Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OOlO!8 <br /> <br />water conservation efforts. Another example is districts with urban constituents wbose domestic <br /> <br /> <br />water supply is threatened by pollution caused by local agricultural practices. <br /> <br />Imposing regu1Jztory requiremenJs <br /> <br />It may be that most irrigation districts will not regulate their own uses absent an <br /> <br />external stick or requirement tbat forces them 'to 00 responsible for achieving water quality <br /> <br />obje<:tives. This type of external control could come from the federal or state levels, <br /> <br />Re[Ulation under the Clean Water Act In the early days of the 1972 Clean Water Act, <br /> <br /> <br />Congress seemed comfortable with regulating agricultural practices as a point source, The <br /> <br />Bureau of Re<:lamatioD then exerted influence on Congress for fear that point source regulation <br /> <br />would have a devastating impact on Bureau project irrigation users. The result has .been a 15 <br /> <br />year Congressional reprieve from regulation, The 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act <br /> <br />require each state to submit an assessment report and management plan for nonpoint source <br /> <br /> <br />pollution, and most western states bave. complied. However, there is no requirement that these <br /> <br />plans be implemented, <br /> <br />While the likelihood of future regulation UDder the point source provisions of the Clean <br /> <br /> <br />Water Act is unlikely, the polity reasoris for the pre\lious exclusion of agriculture from point <br /> <br /> <br />source regulation are not so strong today as they were in 1972. This is because concepts such <br /> <br /> <br />as "best management practices' are well developed today and agencies, including the U.S, <br /> <br /> <br />Department of Agriculture and the EPA, are more comfortable with applying these concepts. <br /> <br />32 <br />