Index

Abiquiu Reservoir, 165

Acequias

cultural values and, 257

discussion of, 96, 174–175

prior appropriation doctrine and tradition of, 51, 261

transfers from, 172

water rights ownership within, 173–174

Ad hoc negotiation, 72, 102–103

Agricultural conservation, 263–264

Agriculture.

See also Irrigated agriculture

appurtenancy restrictions to protect, 77

in Colorado, 154

cultural values regarding, 168

in New Mexico, 167–168

overirrigation of, 230

Ak-Chin Indian settlements, 210

Alaska, 260

Albuquerque, New Mexico, 169, 170

All American Canal, 238, 243, 246

Alpinedecree, 125–127

American Indians.

See Indian communities/reservations;

Tribal governments

American Water Development, Inc., 28

Amity Canal Irrigation Company, 61

Anasazi, 21, 163, 175, 236

Animas-La Plata Project, 178

Appropriative rights

in California, 218, 231

creation of system of, 70

explanation of, 219–220

Appurtenancy rules, 77–78

Area-of-origin impacts

in California, 225–228, 231

committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 10–11, 49–50, 250–251, 257–259

in rural communities, 46, 49–50

Area-of-origin interests

in Colorado, 158

representation of, 258

state laws and, 78–79

Area-of-origin protection

in Arizona, 208–209

in California, 78, 115

in Colorado, 143

components of, 259

discussion of, 115–116

Arizona.

See also Central Arizona case study



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment Index Abiquiu Reservoir, 165 Acequias cultural values and, 257 discussion of, 96, 174–175 prior appropriation doctrine and tradition of, 51, 261 transfers from, 172 water rights ownership within, 173–174 Ad hoc negotiation, 72, 102–103 Agricultural conservation, 263–264 Agriculture. See also Irrigated agriculture appurtenancy restrictions to protect, 77 in Colorado, 154 cultural values regarding, 168 in New Mexico, 167–168 overirrigation of, 230 Ak-Chin Indian settlements, 210 Alaska, 260 Albuquerque, New Mexico, 169, 170 All American Canal, 238, 243, 246 Alpinedecree, 125–127 American Indians. See Indian communities/reservations; Tribal governments American Water Development, Inc., 28 Amity Canal Irrigation Company, 61 Anasazi, 21, 163, 175, 236 Animas-La Plata Project, 178 Appropriative rights in California, 218, 231 creation of system of, 70 explanation of, 219–220 Appurtenancy rules, 77–78 Area-of-origin impacts in California, 225–228, 231 committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 10–11, 49–50, 250–251, 257–259 in rural communities, 46, 49–50 Area-of-origin interests in Colorado, 158 representation of, 258 state laws and, 78–79 Area-of-origin protection in Arizona, 208–209 in California, 78, 115 in Colorado, 143 components of, 259 discussion of, 115–116 Arizona. See also Central Arizona case study

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment conservation efforts in, 87, 263–264 ground water policy in, 25, 86, 194, 196, 200–202 overview of, 194, 196 public interest requirements in, 80 state laws in, 194, 196, 200–201, 250 transfers in, 46, 98, 200 water leases in, 30 water rights purchases in, 29 Arizona v. California, Arkansas River Basin population in, 154 process of transfers in, 157 setting of, 140 transmountain diversion projects in, 144 water quality problems in, 60–61 Arkansas River Valley (Colorado), 49, 50 Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. influence on West of, 87 policy of, 102 role of, 35, 88, 91 and Two Forks Project, 152, 153 Arvin-Edison Water Storage District, 244–245 Beneficial use doctrine, 138 Berrenda Mesa Water District, 225–228, 231 Big Horn, 94 Bonding capacity, 46–47 Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), 187 Booth–Orchard Canal Company, 151 Bosque del Apache, 165 Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) projects of, 202 Pyramid Lake Tribe contact with, 126 Bureau of Land Management, 91 Bureau of Reclamation activity in Arizona, 198–199, 201–202 activity in California, 214, 217, 218, 231, 240 activity in Nevada, 123–125, 131 activity in New Mexico, 177–178 activity in Washington State, 185, 188 influence on West of, 87 management emphasis of, 135 role of, 35, 88, 89, 91, 193, 224 Busk–Ivanhoe Ditch Company, 151 California. See also Central Valley (California) case study; Imperial Valley (California) case study area-of-origin protection law in, 78, 115 dry year option arrangements in, 32 encouragement of water salvage in, 82, 83 environmental impact assessment in, 87, 99 ground water law in, 220 overview of water situation in, 213–214 public interest requirements in, 80 salvaged water transfers in, 33 transfer activity in, 221–225 transfer process in, 230–231 use of public trust doctrine, 101 water allocation in, 236–237 water banks in, 32, 73 water institutions in, 218–221 water rights sales in, 29–30 California Aqueduct, 217 California Development Company, 236, 238 California Environmental Quality Act, 87 Canal lining, 242, 246 Carson River, 121, 123–125 Case studies. See individual states; Water transfer evaluation Central Arizona case study, 6, 62–63, 114. See also Arizona background information for, 194, 196 conclusions regarding, 210–211

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment impacts of surface and ground water transfers in, 204–209 impacts of transfers of Indian water rights in, 209–210 impacts of transfers of sewage effluent in, 209 setting of, 195–200 and urban-rural needs, 14 water institutions discussed in, 200–204 Central Arizona Project (CAP), 199–200, 202–203, 205, 206 Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD), 201 Central Valley (California), 251 Central Valley (California) case study, 6, 62–63, 114–115. See also California area-of-origin impacts in, 225–228 conclusions regarding, 230–232 environmental impacts in, 228–230 overview of, 213–214 setting of, 214–219 water institutions discussed in, 218–225 Central Valley Project (CVP), 88, 216–218, 221, 222 Central Weld County Water District, 149 Chaffey, George, 235 Clean Water Act, 72, 84, 85, 91, 102, 128, 129, 153, 209 Climate change, 25 Coachella Valley, 243, 245, 246 Coachella Valley Water District, 33, 234, 239, 243 Cochiti Reservoir, 165 Colorado amount of transfers in, 40 application approval rate in, 43 area-of-origin protection in, 143, 149 conclusions regarding transfers in, 115–116, 157–160 conservancy districts in, 97, 98. See also various conservancy districts in Colorado instream protections in, 20, 65, 81–82, 156–158 land use decisions in, 86 prior appropriation doctrine in, 137–138, 146, 147, 260 transfer applications filed in, 40 transfer costs in, 43 transfers in northeastern, 147–150 transfers in southeastern, 147, 150–151 transfers of cropland in, 46 water exchanges in, 33 water leases in, 30 water quality issues in, 60–61, 158, 258 water rights purchases in, 27, 28 Colorado–Big Thompson Project (C-BT), 143–145, 148–149, 160 Colorado Canal Company, 150 Colorado Front Range–Arkansas River Valley case study, 6, 62, 114 Arkansas River Basin project in, 144–145 background information for, 137–139 Colorado–Big Thompson project and Windy Gap project in, 143–144 conclusions regarding transfers in, 157–159 conclusions regarding water resource planning and management in, 159–160 current transfers and marketing in, 147–151 environmental impacts in, 155–157 future transbasin diversions discussed in, 151–153 infrastructural differences between projects in, 145–146 institutional and legal considerations involved in, 146–147 setting of, 139–143 socioeconomic impacts in, 154–155 Colorado Front Range (CFR)

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment setting of, 139–140 water allocation in, 137–138, 151–152 water conservancy districts in, 141 Colorado River. See also Colorado Front Range–Arkansas River Valley case study basin-of-origin protection for, 78 in Colorado Front Range, 138 flood of 1905, 244 in Imperial Valley, 33, 236–238, 242–247 supplying Arizona, 194, 199, 238. See also Central Arizona Project (CAP) water rights to, 19, 238 Colorado River Compact, 60, 142–143, 238 Columbia River, 19, 92, 182, 184, 192, 204–205 Committee conclusions and recommendations on area-of-origin impacts, 10–11, 257–259 on cost of transfers, 10, 251–252, 256–257 on environmental impacts, 11–12, 258, 260–261, 264 on federal project water transfers, 13–14, 266–267 on public interest considerations, 11, 259–260 on state and tribal authority, 9, 254–255 on third party interests, 4–5, 8, 255–257 on transfers on Indian communities, 12, 262–263 on unique Indian and Hispanic interests, 12, 261–262 on water conservation and salvage, 12–13, 263–265 on water quality-water quantity and surface-ground water issues, 13, 265–266 on water transfer opportunities, 2, 4, 6–9, 252–254 Committee on Western Water Management, 35–36 Comprehensive planning, 72, 99 Congress, U.S. committee conclusions and recommendations for, 261, 266, 267 policy for resale of federal project water, 13, 266, 267 role in transfer of Indian water off reservations, 95, 96 role in Truckee–Carson water rights settlement, 124 view of federal water transfers, 90–91 Conservancy districts, 96, 97 Conservation. See Soil conservation; Water conservation Contra Costa Water district (CCWD), 61 Costs See Transaction costs Cui-ui, 54, 123, 127, 130–132 Cultural values regarding agriculture, 168 regarding water, 51, 163, 176, 250–251 Cutthroat trout, 123, 127 Damage avoided approach, 61 Department of the Interior, U.S., 13, 122, 224, 266 Operating Criteria and Procedures, 127, 130, 131, 135 role in transfers, 89, 90 Derby Dam, 123 Desert Water Agency, 245 Drainage water in Imperial Valley, 240 management of, 229–230, 232 quality issues and, 85 Drought planning, 159–160 Dry year option arrangements, 32 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), 61 water exchange proposals by, 33

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment Economic impacts felt by third parties, 39, 258 of streamflows, 54 of transfers in rural communities, 45–50 Ecosystems. See also Wetlands impact of transfers on, 52–54, 260 preservation of, 56 Effluent, 85. See also Sewage effluent El Vado Reservoir, 165, 177 Elephant Butte Reservoir, 165–167 Endangered species constraints imposed by protection of, 91 due to habitat reduction, 54, 123 in Nevada, 54, 123, 127, 130–132, 134 protections in New Mexico for, 176–178 Endangered Species Act of 1973, 91, 127, 130, 190 Environmental Defense Fund, 65, 130–131, 246 Environmental impacts in Central Valley (California), 228–230, 232 committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 11–12, 258, 260–261, 264 and effect of instream flows. See Instream flows elements involved in, 56 felt by third parties, 39, 258 of retiring irrigated farmland, 48– 49 state legislation dealing with, 44, 87 of surface and ground water transfers, 204–209 Environmental interests increases in, 24, 249 purchase of water by, 27, 65 Environmental legislation committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 11–12, 258, 260–261, 264 federal, 91–92 restrictive nature of, 44 state, 84–87 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards for effluents, 209 and Two Forks Project, 91, 153 veto power of, 91 Estes Park, 149 Ethnic communities effect of transfers on, 51, 110 legal protections for, 51–52 Fallon Indian Reservation, 123, 127 Fallon Tribe, 123, 134 Federal government committee conclusions and recommendations for, 13–14, 266–267 reserved rights and, 92–96 role in environmental protection, 260–261 role in water transfers, 35 Federal legislation dealing with environmental issues, 44, 91–92, 119–120 dealing with Indian water rights, 92–96 dealing with water quality, 84 reclamation, 87–91 Federal project water Congress and, 90–91 policies regarding, 13–14, 266–267 Federal taxpayers, 111 Fernley wetlands, 129 Fiscal impacts of rural transfers, 46–48 Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S., 91, 133, 187 Fish protection in Nevada, 123, 127, 130–132, 134 streamflow and, 56, 58 in Washington State, 188–190, 192–193 Floristan rates, 125, 126 Fort Lyons Canal Company, 60–61 Freemont, John C., 122 Frying Pan-Arkansas (Fry-Ark) Project, 144, 145

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment Gila River, 202, 204 Governments. See Federal government; State governments; Tribal governments Green Mountain Reservoir (Colorado), 30 Ground water appropriative and correlative rights to, 220 in Arizona, 194, 196, 200–203 in California, 220 interrelationship between surface and, 13, 39, 265 restrictions on new pumping of, 25 social and environmental impact of transfers of, 204–209 Ground Water Management Act of 1980 (Arizona), 115, 194, 196, 200–204, 206, 211, 250 Ground Water Replenishment Act (Arizona), 211 Ground Water Transportation Act (Arizona), 211 Gunnison River, 65, 152 Heron Reservoir, 165 Hispanic communities committee conclusions and recommendations regarding interests of, 12, 261–262 effect of transfers on, 155 establishment of historical or cultural zones for, 262 in New Mexico, 162–163, 250–251 special status of, 51 water use and allocation systems of, 261 Hohokam Indians, 21, 196 Homestake II, 152 Hoover Dam, 238 Hydroelectric power, 25, 251 Idaho instream flow appropriations held by state agencies in, 20 public interest considerations in, 80, 260 restrictions on new ground water pumping in, 25 water bank prices in, 31 water banks in, 64, 73 Impact assessment to improve water law and policy, 99 role of, 72 Imperial Irrigation District (IID), 33, 64, 82–84, 234, 237–243, 246, 263, 264 Imperial Valley (California) case study, 6, 64, 115 background information for, 234 conclusions regarding, 247 future agreements and, 244–247 legal background of, 238–240 setting of, 234–238 third party impacts on, 243–244 transfer negotiations in, 240–241 Water Conservation Agreements of 1989 and, 242–243 Indian communities/reservations. See also Tribal governments; various tribes committee conclusions and recommendations regarding interests of, 12, 261–263 factors regarding transfers on, 53, 262–263 historical or cultural zones for, 262 in New Mexico, 162–163, 174–176 power to influence water allocation process, 119–120 reserved rights and, 92–96 as senior water rights holders, 53 special status of, 51 third party impacts and, 12, 110, 261–262 water leasing by, 53, 263 water use and allocation systems of, 261 Instream flows benefits of, 59–60 in California, 229 in Colorado, 155–157 legislation protecting, 80–82, 156, 177

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment in New Mexico, 176–178, 251 nonuser values generated by, 55, 56 protection of, 65, 265 quantification of, 58–59 recreational uses for, 54–56 U.S claims for, 186–187 water quality benefits from, 57, 59 Instream uses committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 251, 254–255 discussion of, 116–117 Intermountain Power Project (IPP) (Utah), 66–67 Interstate transfers committee conclusions regarding, 19, 254 intrastate vs., 19 Intrastate transfers, 19 Investment, water as, 27–29 Irrigated agriculture amount of water used for, 3, 24 demand and availability of water for, 34, 50, 249 early use of, 21–23 economic and fiscal impact of transfers out of, 45–48 environmental impact of transfers out of, 48–49 impact of transfers out of, 39 Lahontan Valley wetlands and, 120 legislation regarding transfers out of, 250 nature of transfers out of, 44, 46 Irrigation, flood, 236 Irrigation colonies, 22 Irrigation districts, 96, 97 Jemez Reservoir, 165 Jicarilla Apache Reservation, 175 Kern County Water Agency, 225–228 Kern Water Bank, 245 Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge, 60 Kesterson Reservoir, 229 La Hacienda, Inc., 245 La Paz County, Arizona, 46–47, 208 Lahontan Valley wetlands, 120, 121, 130–131 Lake Tahoe, 124–125 Lake Tahoe Dam, 125 Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, 12, 261 Land use legislation, 86 Legislation. See also Federal legislation; State legislation background of water transfer, 70–72 committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 9, 11–13, 255–257, 263–265 environmental impact considerations in, 11–12, 44 inadequacies of transfer, 26–27 instream flow, 80–82, 156, 177 options for improving, 98–99, 101–104 originating from colonial Spanish law, 166 special district, 96–98 third parties protections in, 42, 44 Litigation, 256 Local governments, 39 Matheson, Scott M., 2 McCarran Amendment, 186 Metropolitan Water District (MWD) (California) exchange activities by, 33, 34 Imperial Irrigation District and, 64, 82–84, 234, 238–247, 263, 264 involvement in transfers of salvaged water, 32 Mexico, 244 Mexico–United States Free Trade Agreement, 244 Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District, 165, 167, 170–171, 177 Minimum flow, 58 Mono Lake (California), 57, 59 Montana transfer legislation in, 79

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment water leases in, 30 Mormons, 22, 196, 198, 236 Nambe Falls Dam, 177–178 National Audubon Society v. Superior Court, National Environmental Policy Act, 91, 99, 135 National Marine Fisheries Service, 187 National Park Service, 91 Native Americans. See Indian communities/reservations; Tribal governments Nature Conservancy, 65, 131, 133 Navajo communities, 175 Nevada. See also Truckee–Carson Basins (Nevada) case study amount of transfers in, 40 instream flow appropriations held by state agencies in, 20 no-water-metering policy of, 128 public interest requirements in, 79 New Mexico. See also Northern New Mexico case study allocation traditions in, 162–163 amount of transfers in, 40 application approval rate in, 44 applications filed in, 40 average PITCs incurred in, 43 effect of modern water law on minority communities in, 51 public interest requirements in, 79–80 restrictions on new ground water pumping in, 25 transfer policies in, 79, 256 types of transfers in, 168–171 water rights prices in, 29, 169 New Mexico v. Aamodt, New River, 244 Newlands, Francis G., 122 Newlands Project, 65, 120–124, 126–132, 134 No injury rule committee conclusions regarding, 253 discussion of, 73, 75–76 problems with use of, 188 as restriction on transfers, 71 Nonintercourse Act, 95, 96 North Dakota, 40 Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD), 97, 142, 145–147, 149, 150, 152, 157, 160 Northern New Mexico case study, 6. See also New Mexico background of, 162–163 conclusions of, 178 economic setting of, 167–171 impact of transfers on communities in, 176 institutional and legal setting of, 166–167 instream flows and, 176–178 physical setting of, 163–165 special needs of ethnic community and, 14 type of transfers in, 171–174 Northwest Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980, 92 Operating Criteria and Procedures (OCAP), 127, 130, 131, 135 Option value, 55, 57 Oregon encouragement of water salvage in, 82–84 instream protection program in, 265 Orr Ditchdecree, 125–127 Otero Canal Company, 151 Owens Valley, 115, 224 Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act, 187 Painted Rocks Reservoir (Montana), 30 Palo Verde Irrigation District, 234, 239, 245, 246 Palo Verde Valley, 236, 243 Pecos River, 67

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment Plan de Pitic, 166 Planet Ranch, 207 Platte River Greenway Foundation, 156–157 Platte River Power Authority, 149 Policy-induced transaction costs (PITCs), 43, 44 Powell, John Wesley, 122 Powell Survey of 1868, 23 Principles and Standards for Planning Water and Related Land Resources (Water Resource Council), 106, 107 “Principles Governing Voluntary Water Transactions That Involve or Affect Facilities Owned or Operated by the Department of the Interior ” (DOI), 89 Prior appropriation doctrine application of, 22–23, 251 background of, 70–71 in Colorado, 137–138, 146, 147, 260 problems with, 191 and tradition of acequias, 51, 261 in Truckee–Carson Basins, 125 Property rights, 19–20, 73, 74 Property tax base, 46, 47 Public interest review to improve water law and policy, 98–99 in New Mexico, 172, 250 past uses of, 75 role of, 72 state laws and, 11, 44, 79–80, 253 Public interests committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 11, 259–260 expanded definition of, 178, 180 Public trust administration, 11, 260 Public trust doctrine allocation role of, 192 for environmental protection use, 207, 229 role of, 72, 101–102 Pueblo Indians, 163, 175, 176 Pueblo Lands Act of 1924, 176 Pyramid Lake, 117, 120–122, 126–130 Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe, 63, 122, 123, 126–130, 133 Pyramid Lake Reservation, 129–130 Reclamation Act of 1902, 88, 122, 240 Reclamation law, 13, 87–91 Reclamation policy, 35 Reclamation Reform Act of 1982, 230 Recreation effect of transfers on, 56, 57 streamflows as benefit for, 54, 55 water demands for, 26, 249 Reid, Frank, 129 Reservations. See Indian communities/reservations; Tribal governments Revegetation, 48–49 Rifkind, Simon, 240 Rio Chama River, 165, 177 Rio Grande Compacts of 1938, 166–167 Rio Grande River, 163–165. See also Northern New Mexico case study Rio Grande Underground Water Basin, 170 Rio Grande Valley, 163, 164 Riparian rights, 218–219, 231 Rocky Ford Ditch Company, 151 Rocky Ford Highline Canal Company, 151 Rural communities area-of-origin protections for, 49–50 effect of urban water demand on, 139 environmental impacts of retiring irrigated farmland in, 48–49 impact of transfers on, 45–48, 110–111 protection of, 66

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment transfers effecting Colorado, 154–155, 158 transfers in Arizona, 205 Russian thistle (Tumbleweeds), 48, 207 Salt River Project (SRP), 199, 201, 202 Salton Sea, 64, 84, 240, 244, 246, 247 Salvaged water transfers, 32–33. See also Water salvage San Carlos Irrigation Project, 199, 202 San Joaquin Valley, 85, 214, 216, 229, 230, 244, 246. See also Central Valley (California) case study San Juan–Chama Project, 165, 169, 170, 173 San Juan River, 165 San Luis Valley, 153, 155 Sangre de Cristo Water Company, 169 Santa Fe River, 169 Saved Water Act (Washington State), 190 Secondary succession, 48–49 Secretary of Interior, 13–14 Seven Party Agreement of 1931, 239, 241 Sewage effluent impacts of transfers of, 209 treatment of, 129 as waste water, 128 water rights status of, 265 Sierra Pacific Power, 128, 130 Sleeper case, 172 Snake River, 64 Social impacts felt by third parties, 39, 258 of surface and ground water transfers, 204–205 of transfers out of irrigated agriculture, 47, 49 Soil conservation, 87 South Platte River Basin, 140, 142, 151 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District (SCWCD), 140, 144–147 Southern Colorado Water Conservancy District, 157 Stampede Reservoir, 125, 127, 128, 130–132 State engineers, 74–75 State governments authority and responsibility of, 9, 254–255, 258, 259, 262, 266 role in environmental protection, 260–261 and role of third parties in decisionmaking process, 14 tax policies of, 258, 259 water policy of, 41 water quality management by, 13 State legislation. See also Legislation appurtenancy restrictions in, 77– 78 basin-of-origin protection in, 78–79 constraints on special districts by, 97–98 dealing with environmental impact, 44, 87 dealing with Indian use of water on reservations, 263 dealing with water quality, 84–86 historical use limitations in, 76–77 instream protections in, 80–82 land use and, 86 no injury rule and, 73, 75#8211;76, 253 overview of, 73 public interest review and, 11, 79–80, 253 soil conservation and, 87 water salvage issue and, 82–84 State Water Project (SWP) (California), 217, 221–223, 225, 227, 228, 245 States, transfers within or between, 19 Stillwater National Wildlife Management Area, 124, 130, 131, 134 Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge, 65, 117, 127, 133 Streamflows.See Instream flows Sunnyside Valley Irrigation Project, 183

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment Supreme Court, U.S. on allocation of waters between Nevada and California, 124 on allocation of waters of Colorado River, 142 on federal and Indian reserved rights, 92–94 on Orr Ditchdecree, 126, 127 on state regulation, 88 on transfer regulations and interstate commerce, 79 Surface water appropriative rights to, 219 interrelationship between ground and, 13, 39, 265 riparian rights to, 219 social and environmental impact of transfers of, 204–209 trade involving surplus, 33–34 Taxation committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 258, 259 effect of transfers on, 63 Taxpayers, as third parties, 111 Texas, 180 Third parties. See also various third parties explanation of, 2, 5, 17, 38 legal protection for, 42, 44 participation in transfer process by, 2, 4, 100–101 and public interest considerations, 11, 259–260 Third party impacts. See also Area-of-origin impacts; Environmental impacts accounting for, 3–4 assessment and mitigation of, 13, 254–257 in Central Arizona, 204–210 in Colorado Front Range–Arkansas River Valley, 154–158 evaluation of, 35–36, 254 nature of, 5, 17, 39, 111 transaction costs and. See Transaction costs from transfers involving federal project water. of transfers on Indian communities, 12, 261–262 tribal governments ' consideration of, 263 in Yakima Basin, 189–191 Third party interests need for mechanisms to accommodate, 14–15 representation of, 18, 21 transaction costs to address, 252, 256 types of, 109–111 Tieton Reservoir, 183 Tohono O'odham Indian settlements, 210 Transaction costs, 3 committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 10, 251–252, 256–257 discussion of, 43–44, 117–118 expectations regarding, 222–223 for making applications, 40, 41 policy-induced, 43, 44 reasons for increased, 25 transfer benefits vs., 18–19, 24 Transaction tax, 258 Transmountain diversion. See Colorado Front Range–Arkansas River Valley case study. Treaty of 1855, 185 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, 176 Tribal governments. See also Indian communities/reservations approval and administration of transfers by, 262–263 authority and responsibility of, 9, 254–255, 258, 259, 266 management of water quality by, 13 role in environmental protection, 260–261 and role of third parties in decisionmaking process, 14 Truckee Canal, 123, 124

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment Truckee–Carson Basins (Nevada), 29, 114 Truckee–Carson Basins (Nevada) case study background information on, 119–120 committee views regarding, 251 conclusions regarding, 116, 117, 133–135 as example of diverse interests, 14 initial allocation in, 125–126 recent and planned transfers in, 131–133 setting of, 120–124 tribal interests and endangered species in, 126–128 urban growth in, 128–130 water delivery system in, 124–125 wetland ecosystem maintenance in, 130–131 Truckee–Carson Irrigation District (TCID), 122, 124, 127, 133 Truckee–Carson–Pyramid Lake Water Settlement Act, 119, 123, 124, 128, 131 Truckee River, 121, 124, 125 Truckee River Agreement of 1935, 125, 126 Trust water right, 188 Tumbleweeds (Russian thistle), 48, 207 Twin Lakes Project, 144–145 Twin Lakes Reservoir, 150 Two Forks Project, 91, 97, 152–153, 159 U.S. Geological Survey, 41 United States of America v. Alpine Land and Reservoir Co., United States of America v. Orr Water Ditch Company, Upper Snake River Water Bank (Idaho), 31 Urban growth impacts of, 139, 265 transfers and, 62 in Truckee Meadows area, 128–130 water needs based on, 25–26 Utah amount of transfers in, 40 application approval rate in, 44 average PITCs incurred in, 43 dry year option arrangements in, 32 public interest requirements in, 79 restrictions on transfers in, 97 water rights prices in, 29 Voluntary water transfers committee view of, 249 concerns regarding, 42, 132 to instream uses, 251 involuntary vs., 39–40 in rural communities, 49 Washington State. See also Yakima Basin (Washington) Water. See also Ground water; Surface water calculations for consumption of, 76–77 changing demands for, 1, 25–27 interrelationship between ground and surface, 13, 39 as investment, 27–29 nature of, 257 payments made with, 67 social and cultural values regarding, 51, 163, 176, 250–251 uses for, 23 Water authorities, 96, 97 Water banks, 31–32, 64, 73 Water conservation in Arizona, 203 committee conclusions and recommendations on, 12–13, 263–265 in Washington State, 187, 188 Water Conservation Agreement of 1989, 240–243, 246 Water exchanges, 33 Water farms in Arizona, 197, 205 controversial nature of, 196

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment environmental damage from, 207–208 Water leases explanation of, 30 Indian communities engaged in, 53, 263 prices of, 30 Water management assumptions guiding previous, 1–2 in Colorado, 159, 160 measurement of effects of, 107–108 transfers as component of, 253 trends in, 21 Water marketing acceptance of, 16–17, 34–35 benefits of, 3 explanation of, 2–3 Water quality committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 265–266 impact of, 60–62 of irrigated water, 3 issues related to, 24, 85 relationship between water quantity and, 1, 13, 85, 265 state laws dealing with, 84, 86 streamflows as benefit for, 57, 59–60 Water quantity committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 13, 265–266 involved in transfers, 40, 256 relationship between water quality and, 1, 13, 85, 265 restriction of, 86 Water ranches, 29 Water rights farm-to-industry sale of, 27 Indian, 53, 176, 209–210 investment in, 27–29 prices of recent purchases of, 27, 29, 128 as property rights, 19–20, 73, 74 for third parties, 4 trust, 188 Water rights holders, 20, 53, 110 Water salvage. See also Imperial Valley (California) case study committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 12–13, 263–265 explanation of, 32–33 state laws dealing with, 82–84, 160 Water transfer applications approval rate and approval decisionmaking time for, 40 in Colorado, 43 costs involved in making, 40, 41 Water transfer evaluation. See also individual case studies case studies examined for, 6, 111–114 critical issues examined for, 114–118 elements of, 106, 108–111 Water transfer policy committee conclusions and recommendations regarding, 41, 255–257 discussion of shift in, 41 goals of, 72 options to improve, 98–104 Water transfer process need for increased efficiency in, 160 participation of third parties in, 2, 4, 100–101 protection of interests in, 72 role of legislation in, 6, 8 The Water Transfer Process as a Management Option for Meeting Changing Demands(U.S. Geological Survey), 41 Water transfers. See also Committee conclusions and recommendations of agricultural water, 191 area-of-origin impacts of . See Area-of-origin impacts.; Area-of-origin protection

OCR for page 287
Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment balancing efficiency and equity in, 14-15 definition of, 2 discussion of recent, 27, 29-30 effect on federal taxpayers, 63 extent of, 40, 41 factors to consider when assessing potential, 7, 113 historical background of, 21-23 off Indian reservations, 95 as opportunities to resolve problems, 64-67 purpose of, 2, 23-25, 40, 250 role of state engineer in, 74-75 of salvaged water, 32-33 third party impacts of. See Third party impacts transaction costs involved in. See Transaction costs types of, 30-34, 108-109 voluntary versus involuntary, 39-40. See also Voluntarv water transfers Welton-Mohawk Irrigation Project, 199 Western Governors’ Association, 89 Western Governors’ Association. Water Efficiency Working Group, 89 Western States Water Council, 40 Western Water Rights Management, Inc. (WWRM, Inc.), 28 WESTPAC, 128 Wet water, 67, 132 Wetlands impact of transfers on, 53-54, 120 in Nevada, 120, 121, 123-124, 130-131 policies and laws to protect, 91, 260-261 Wildlife management. See also Fish protection; Truckee-Carson Basins (Nevada) case study importance of streamflows to, 57, 155-156 under Nevada law, 133 uses of water for, 56 Wind River Reservation, 94 Windy Gap Project, 78, 103, 143, 148-150, 159 Winnemucca Lake, 122 Winters doctrine, 92-94, 176 Wyoming instream flow appropriations held by state agencies in, 20 public interest requirements in, 80 salvaged water transfers in, 32-33 transfer applications filed in, 40 Wyoming Plan, 74 Yakima Basin (Washington) case study, 6, 115 background information for, 182-184 conclusions regarding, 191-193 setting of, 184-189 third party impacts in, 189-191 voluntary transfers in, 251 Yakima Indian Nation, 184-187, 190, 192 Yakima River, 182-184 Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project, 187, 189 Yuba County Water Agency, 245 Yuma Irrigation District, 240 Yuma Project, 239 Yuma Valley, 236