Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001008 <br /> <br />when a districi has a drainage system in place to collect tbe runoff and return flows, maybe tbis <br /> <br /> <br />system should be regulated as a point source. Also, it makes sense to some participants to <br /> <br />make districts responsible entities because they can spread the costs over all users much as <br /> <br />they've done with distribution works. There was a concern expressed by some participants that <br /> <br /> <br />treating districts like private entities for purposes of pollution control may financially destroy <br /> <br />some irrigation districts, <br /> <br />Erpansion of dirtrict aJJJhority <br /> <br />Giving additional authority to districts is a positive approach that is unlikely to meel <br /> <br /> <br />with district board resistance, It is possible tbat tbis step alone will provide tbe necessary <br /> <br /> <br />incentive to make some districts take on pollution control responsibilities, More specific <br /> <br /> <br />delegation of pollution control autbority is more likely to provide this incentive, For example, <br /> <br /> <br />the idea of tradable emission permits could be borrowed from federal air quality programs and <br /> <br /> <br />applied to waste allocation levels. The districts could be delegated the authority to trade their <br /> <br /> <br />waste discharge permits. This concept was" tried in Colorado at Cherry Creek Reservoir and at <br /> <br /> <br />Dillon Reservoir. The program at Cherry Creek was not effective bowever, and ultimately user <br /> <br /> <br />fees were raised to provide tbe necessary clean up funds, <br /> <br />Providing incoItives" to districts <br /> <br />Subsidv Drom-ams. There is a down side to govenunent subsidies to districts for <br /> <br /> <br />pollution control. While they may encourage some districts to implement pollution control <br /> <br /> <br />programs, some well-intentioned suh,sid~ pro~ams may actually compound the agricQlture <br /> <br /> <br />30 <br />