Western Water

To Make the Deserts Bloom

The world of water rights in the Western United States is a world unto itself. In the west water is everything. Without water the desert does not bloom. Without water, cattle and sheep ranching are marginal if not impossible. Water rights are conveyed by priority of date. In a western watershed the person with the oldest claim uses as much of the total supply as they wish to use. The second oldest date holder uses as much of the remainder as they wish to and so on until there is no water left. The Interior's Bureau of Reclamation provides the water for irrigation in the west. Every river that can be dammed has been dammed and the water rights are assigned downstream.

Reserved Water Rights

Large flows of western water were reserved. The first group with reserved water rights is the Federal Government as the proprietor of the public domain. The second group is Indian tribes as the aboriginal proprietors of the Indian domains. President Carter, by executive order, gave excess Federal water rights, including Indian water rights to the States.

The water is public water. The water is sold by the Federal government to private individuals or corporations. Water has not only been impounded but shifted from one watershed to another by diversion tunnels and canals and other feats of engineering. Water from Northern California has been diverted to Southern California for instance.

Missouri River Water for the West

During the Arab Oil crisis there was much interest in using oil shale as a source of oil. Large quantities of water are needed to process the oil shale. A leading oil company proposed that the Federal government divert water from the Missouri River drainage through the Rocky Mountains to Western Colorado. It would have cost about 4 billion in 1972 dollars. Multiply that by 4 for 1989 dollars.

Double Whammy

Among the abuses of subsidized irrigation water is the use of subsidized water to grow crops that are already in surplus. So in effect the farmer, or farm corporation, is using water subsidized by taxes to grow crops that are subsidized by taxes. For the tax payers the result is high cost cotton, for instance, because the Federal Government supports the prices with tax payer supplied taxes. A classic lose/lose for the taxpayer and a classic win/win for the tax subsidized grower.

With subsidized water and price supports the western growers can out compete the eastern and southern growers who are only subsidized on price but not on water.

CAP is the Big Daddy

The big daddy of all water projects is the Central Arizona Project. At a cost of billions of dollars it was going to make the desert into productive agricultural land. The water from the Central Arizona Project has not reached the Tucson area yet, but Tucson is betting on the come. Tucson is depleting it's ground water at a rapid rate, a rate so high that in other circumstances prudence would consider insane. They hope that before their groundwater runs out, the CAP will be there with water in abundance. In the meantime Tucson has expanded as though the CAP were already there. For their present water supply the city is woefully over extended, but with CAP their growth is just beginning. Water that was brought long distances for agriculture is going to be used for city water supply. This is an ecologically sound development and economically prudent.

City vs. Farm

Farmers and farm corporations cannot pay for the cost of water and make money growing crops. In many instances they must also have the cost of the crop supported as well. A city on the other hand can well afford to pay for its water supply. It not only can pay for the cost of development and delivery but make a profit as well. Farmers cannot pay much more than $11 an acre foot for water. A city can easily pay $1000 an acre foot.

I have my water bill before me from Washington, DC. During the measurement period our household used 2500 cubic feet of water at a cost of $2.868 per hundred cubic feet, (2.87 cents per cubic foot). An acre has 43,560 square feet. An acre foot therefore would have 43,560 cubic feet of water. This quantity multiplied by 2.87 cents per cubic foot, amounts to $1250.17 per acre foot. The standard of living in Tucson is not much different from Washington, DC. They could also afford to pay $1200/acre foot for water as well. The highest and best use for water in the desert is to urbanize the desert.

Many people want to live in the desert because it is healthful. Supplying water for desert urbanization provides healthy environments for thousands of people.

Poisonous Salts

Irrigation on the other hand concentrates the toxic heavy metals in the soil. The irrigation water seeps into the soil where it is absorbed by the plants. The water in the soil dissolves salts. These dissolved salts are transported to the surface of the soil as the water evaporates. Washing these salts out of the surface soil in the Imperial Valley of California caused the toxification of a wildlife refuge. The pollution killed large numbers of ducks and other marsh wildlife.

There may be an argument that fresh vegetables are available in the winter in the United States because of irrigated land in Southern California, Arizona etc. I would have no problem subsidizing the growth of fresh vegetables for the table. I do have a problem with irrigated cotton. It would, however, make the most sense to grow crops where rainfall is abundant and therefore not in need of subsidy. Subsidized water should be used for urban development where the costs can be sustained without undue strain on the local economy.

Public Domain Policy Nil

The contracts the Federal government signs with the western growers are proof that we do not have water policy. We have a system of government where the public domain can be exploited to benefit selected groups at the expense of the general proprietors.

Urbanization is the Answer

There was ample reason to spend Federal dollars to develop the west. Long term subsidization after the development has been completed indicates either poor planning or development. Sooner or later the west is going to have to support itself. Urbanization and industrialization are better mechanisms than agriculture. Agriculture should thrive where it can under natural conditions. Urbanization should thrive where conditions could make it flourish. The desert is ideal for urbanization. Areas with high rainfall are ideal for agriculture. These relationships are simple ecology. The engine for change is a first rate university system. Each State east and west has one.

The problem is that once dependency arises it is difficult to terminate. The western representatives to the Congress who can deliver this dependency are reelected.

Westerners are fiercely independent. Are they fiercely independent precisely because they are so dependent, on the Federal lands, water, and dollars? We have a national government. We have national taxation. What we don't have is national planning. We are using 19th century concepts of rugged individualism with 20th century concepts of Federal subsidies to create a system of dependency. In a democracy local interests must be served. Fostering dependency is not in our local or national interest. Nobody has an unalienable right to a Federal subsidy and nobody has the unalienable right to exploit the public domain.

© Copyright 1989
Institute for domestic Tranquility