Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OGifl55 <br /> <br />revenues for farmers and in additional water supplies for purchasers of conserved water. In <br /> <br />other places, it may not. For example, allegedly, conservation may dry up wetlands and disturb <br /> <br />return flow dependencies in the South Platte Valley of Colorado. In other words, not <br /> <br />surprisingly, conservation is not in itself an unalloyed good. <br /> <br />Q: If conservation is not, itself, always a valid social policy objective, what is? <br /> <br />A:. "Efficient" conservation is a valid social policy objective. I use "efficient" to refer to <br /> <br />conservation in which net social benefits exceed costs. <br /> <br />Q: Isn't this criterion--net social benefits-impossible of application in the real world? <br /> <br />A:. Technically speaking, yes, not the least because neither the price of water nor the prices of <br /> <br /> <br />closely-related commodities equal their social marginal costs, whatever they are. But this does <br /> <br /> <br />not mean we cannot develop policy to promote conservation of water by irrigation districts that <br /> <br /> <br />would provide broad social benefits. It does suggest, though, that in doing so we keep an eye <br /> <br /> <br />on all of the effects of potential policy changes as we consider them. <br /> <br />Present policy and ronservation by irrigation districts <br /> <br />Q: Does present western water policy encourage efficient conservation by irrigation districts? <br /> <br />21 <br />