Laserfiche WebLink
<br />'00';'" / ") <br />..I.-tJ"t..l <br /> <br />. Growth in urban water demand is not inevitable, the economic prospects of the <br />west have changed within the past three years and locally incurred costs for waste <br />water treatment may reduce urban water use by driving up water rates; <br /> <br />. if real water rates remain constant and with population growth projected by U.S. <br />Bureau of Census in 1985, irrigation water use must decline westwide by 8.8 percent <br />(6.5 million af/yr) by the year 2000 to meet growing urban demands; <br /> <br />. if real water rates remain constant and with population growth projected by Census . <br />in 1988, irrigation water use must decline westwide by 7.0 percent (5.1 million af/yr) <br />by the year 2000 to meet growing urban demands; <br /> <br />. if real water rates double and with population growth projected by Census in 1988, <br />irrigation water use must decline by only 21 percent (1.5 million af/yr) by the year <br />2000 to meet growing urban water demands; <br /> <br />. agriculture in Arizona, California, Nevada, Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington must <br />make large percentage reductions,.unIess urban water rates double. <br /> <br />In sum, relatively modest reallocations of water are required to meet municipal demands, even <br /> <br />if per capita urban water use remains constant. Moreover, higher water prices (reflecting <br /> <br />anticipated waste water treatment costs) may reduce per capita use by 22 percent. In this <br /> <br />situation, significant reallocation of water from agriculture to municipal areas will be limited to <br /> <br />those states (or regions of a state) which have high population growth rates and small increases <br /> <br />in water charges. Municipalities with average or below average growth may have little demand <br /> <br />for water from agriculture. <br /> <br />Significant reductions in irrigation use will be concentrated in a few states -- see Table 1. <br /> <br />Examining the estimated reductions from the third scenario (most recent population 8.75 growth <br /> <br />estimates and doubled real water prices), reductions in irrigation use greater than two percent <br /> <br />are likely to occur in only five states (Arizona, California, New Mexico, Nevada, and Texas). <br /> <br />7 <br />