Markets for Federal Water: Subsidies, Property Rights, and the Bureau of Reclamation

By Richard W. Wahl | Go to book overview
Save to active project

application of CAP agricultural water exceeds this amount, and (3) transfers to urban use may dilute the priority of M&I water users, including those who were not direct parties to the exchange.

If the water-using entities, in conjunction with the Central Arizona Water Conservancy District, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Arizona Department of Water Resources, were to decide that the ability to transfer CAP water was desirable, each of these contractual provisions could be restructured to facilitate transfers: (1) the Bureau and CAWCD could allow retention of increased income to the selling district provided project costs were paid; (2) transfer between agricultural use and M&I use could be made on an acre-foot-per-acre basis, and (3) transfers to M&I use from irrigation use could be structured so as to leave the existing priorities for water intact (that is, the transferred water could either be placed in a priority below other M&I water or it could carry its original agricultural priority). Municipal and industrial entities desiring more first-priority water would have to purchase it from other M&I entities. Transfers would also need to be structured so as to comply with existing Arizona groundwater legislation.

Market transfers of non-CAP water are already taking place in Arizona, so it is not unreasonable to believe that transfers of some categories of federal project water would be seen as advantageous as well. Given the length of advance time needed for water planning, it probably is not too soon to begin thinking about how a future market for CAP water might be structured to the mutual benefit of the water- using entities.


References

Bush David B., and William E. Martin. 1986. Potential Costs and Benefits to Arizona Agriculture of the Central Arizona Project, Technical Bulletin 254, Arizona Agricultural Experiment Station ( Tucson, University of Arizona).

Maxey Kenneth G., and Norman H. Starler. 1987. "Cost Sharing in Transition: The Case of Plan 6, Central Arizona Project," Water Resources Bulletin vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 749-759 (October).

McCauley Charles, and Russell Gum. 1975. "Land Subsidence: An Economic Analysis," Water Resources Bulletin vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 148-154 (February).

Saliba Bonnie C., and David B. Bush. 1987. Water Markets in Theory and Practice: Market Transfers, Water Values, and Public Policy ( Boulder, Colo., Westview Press).

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. 1979. Final Environmental Statement, Salt-Gila Aqueduct, Central Arizona Project

-250-

Notes for this page

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this page

Cited page

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited page

Bookmark this page
Markets for Federal Water: Subsidies, Property Rights, and the Bureau of Reclamation
Table of contents
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this book

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen
/ 312

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?