WSP02054 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

available stream flows and reservoir storage, but would often equal or exceed the hydropower values noted above. . ~ ~ ~ Conclusion: Entitlements, Cost Incidence and Control Strateoies In the final analysis, the choice of strategy and the incidence of costs for salinity control depend upon who holds "rights" or entitlements for water qual ity. An entitlement defines which parties are responsible for sa1 infty control (Bromley). If there is no "right to pollute," then those responsible for salt discharges must bear the costs; if pollution is a legal right, then those damaged by salinity must finance the desired salinity control. Downstream RiQhts to Water Qual ity -- If the pub1 ic (downstream users) held a right to nondegraded water, polluters would be liable in proportion to their contribution to salt load. This contribution might be determined according to the proportions of salts attributed by. the Environmental Protection Agency to the major groups: 37" from irrigators in the Upper Colorado River basin, 47" from lands owned by the Federal government, 12:' from reservoir evaporation (primarfly Lakes Powell and Meade), 3" from water exporters, and 1" from municipal water users. Because a federal or regional agency would conceptually levy the taxes upon salt discharges, cost sharing policies that distribute 37" of net social costs to Upper Basin farmers are of especial interest here. Several possibilities exist. Either an increasing block water rate of S4.00 and S28.00 per acre foot. along with 46~ cost sharing, or increasing block water rates of S4.00 and S14.00 with a S11.95 per acre-foot water conservation subsidy would achieve this level. Of course, each option has a different net social cost and salt load reduction. A salinity control program should, from the allocative 18