Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Cj <br />--.1 <br />~ <br />..,.. <br /> <br />While instream impacts tend to he very site specific, the assessment's <br />analyses clearly indicate that the White River would be more adversely <br />affected by large-scale EET development than any other river. in the Upper <br />Basin. The. second most impacted river would likely be the Colorado Main <br />Stem River from about Rifle to Cameo; Colorado. In both instances, the <br />probabl~ concentration of oil shale development in northwestern Colorado <br />and northeastern Utah would be the caUse of such impacts; <br /> <br />Of particular interest from an institutional point of view is the <br />fact that both of these rivers are habited by federally designated rare <br />and endangered species (i.e., the Colorado River squawfish and the hump- <br />back chub). Thus, the. availability of surface water for EETs in these two <br />basins is a matter which must be considered in the context of the laws and <br />programs pertaining to the preservation and enhancement of such species. <br /> <br />Impacts of Transferring Water from Irrigated Agriculture. While it <br />is not anticipated, as discussed previously, that there need to be transfers <br />of significant amounts of water from irrigated agriculture to EETs, such <br />transfers are nonetheless possible under each Upper Basin State's water <br />rights system. The impacts that would be associated with such transfers <br />are discussed below. <br /> <br />With respect to economic impacts, an acre-foot of water transferred <br />to EET use from irrigated agriculture would, all other things being equal, <br />result in a regional loss in personal income due to reductions in the <br />agricultural sector. However, this would be regional income gain due to the <br />increased size of the EET sectors. Generally speaking, the gain would be <br />from 10 to 100 times greater than the loss. Put another way, the marginal <br />income from an acre-foot of water devoted to EETs is 10 to 100 times greater <br />than the marginal income from an acre-foot of water consumed for irrigated <br />agriculture. Any such transfers would also result in a redistribution of <br />income and economic wealth, but these consequences have not been examined <br />in this study. <br /> <br />In terms of social conditions, transfers of water from irrigated agri- <br />culture may reduce the number of farm units in a region and, in turn the <br />number of families deriving their meanS from such enterprises. Thus, one <br />might be tempted to infer that significant changes in the rural nature of <br />the Upper Basin would accompany such transfers. However, as was noted <br />earlier , the Upper Basin (or, at least, certain counties therein) will <br />bear scant resemblance to the rural area. it is today if either of the <br />two postulated levels of EET development comes to pass. Thus, one must <br />conclude that such transfers would play a minor role in shaping social <br />conditions in the Upper Basin relative to the larger economic and demo- <br />graphic forces that will be brought to bear by EET development in general. <br /> <br />cxi}{ <br />