WSP02505 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

0033'i6 Regional Forester 5 The relationship was a comparison of total withdrawals and total consump- tion based on Water Resource Council data for the basins involved. It appears from Dr. White's discussions that using return flow analysis was an attempt to calculate the value if all the water were consumed. In contrast, the RPA values reflect the total consumption of the water and, therefore,there is no return flow. This RPA approach does not include a value for water in transit or reduce values for transmission losses. Similarly, there is no value added for the non-consumptive uses of water along the way. In the case of hydroelectric power, the incremental tlater yield has straight-fol~ard power production. The value of power can be added to the consucptive use value where incremental I/ater yields are in fact being so used. The TableuRegion 2 Geographic Value of I~ater, does not include any power generation revenues. Powel' revenues were not in the guidelines given by the Regional Economist or the RPA procedures. Step 4. Adjustment for Proportional Use between Agriculture and M+I Uses. . Exhibit 4 briefly indicates Dr. White's adjustment for a combin~d use of water for H+I as well as agricultural uses. Projected use by basin is available from Hater Resource Council publi- cations. The projected changes for M+I and agricultural consumptive use were used to calculate the Region's water values for time periods 1975, 1985. and 2000. This adjustment is within the RPA guidelines. ~;I j ( ~,1/)j. THONA$ E. SCHESSLER Director, Watershed, Soils and Hinera 1 s Area Managell',ent Enclosures (4) Exhibit 1 -.Adjustment of W4ter Values Based upon Agricultural Consumptive Use Exhibit 2 - Adjustments to Water Value for Evaporation Exhibit 3 - Adjustments to Water Value for Return Flows Exhibit 4 - Adjustments to Water Value for Proportioned Use in M+I Use and ._JrrJg~~ion_____. .. _ ___ ._ ___. __.__._.n u__ __._~__,.__ _.___. ..__ t,l\lv /:iil