My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09212
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09212
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:51:59 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:31:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8273.600
Description
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control - Federal Agencies - USDA
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
6/26/1987
Author
Gardner and Young
Title
Assessing Strategies for Control of Irrigation-Induced Salinity in the Upper Colorado River Basin
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />o <br />0. The allocathe efficiency of cont.rol strategies depenes en how c1rectly <br />tJ'1 <br />Co -' tr,e economic incentive achieves ttle desired bel'la'Y1or. Thus. an effluent tax en <br /> <br />salt discharges would be the most eff1c1en't policy tool in terms of net social <br /> <br />cost, because the tax can only be avoided by la"oring salt d1schar!;j8s. <br /> <br />Influent taxes on irrigation water are less effect1...e due to the 1rrperfect <br /> <br />correlation between water use and salt C:1scnarge. The lo..est-cost mettled to <br /> <br />reduce salt loading in the Grand Vel1ey 15 with 1rr.pro\led irrigation practices <br /> <br /> <br />appl1e( to corn first, 'then barley, dry beans, pasture, and finally alfalfa. <br /> <br />However. water hi conserved lJIOst effectfvely by applying irrigation changes <br /> <br />ffrst to alfalfa and pasture, then corn, and finally barley and dry be~ns. The <br /> <br />difference reduces ttle effectheness of influent taxes as a salinity control.. <br /> <br />tool. Water rentals (discussed balo.) ~ould achieve virtually the sa~e results <br /> <br />as .ater tax.es. <br /> <br />Subsidizing irrfgation syst.em 1lt.proverr.ents fs even less <br /> <br />effective. because the private econcmic incentive 1s to upgrade irr1gat1cn <br /> <br />infrastn.lC'ture to conserve labor as .ell as .ater. This adds one more 1inka;e <br /> <br />between the incentive and lo.er salt discharges. while fal1ing to encourage <br /> <br />labor-intensive salinity control. <br /> <br />Distributive IllDact.s of Abatement Stra:t.8Q1es <br /> <br />Our distributive i/t.pact analysfs a:easures the burden of costs imposed on <br /> <br /> <br />each of the groups involved. Differences 1n distributional effects (fncluding <br /> <br /> <br />both damage costs and abatement expenditures) for a range of strategies are <br /> <br /> <br />analyzed 1n tables 3 and 4 for their 1rrpac-: on (a) Grand Valley far:r.ers. (b) <br /> <br /> <br />the federal government (i.e.. ttle taxpayers) and ec) the down-river <br /> <br />beneftcfades.7 <br /> <br />(Of course. the cost stlare attributed here to the governrr.ent <br /> <br />l4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.