U.S. Issues New Policy on Marketing Water to Spur Conservation

The U.S. Interior Department has issued a water marketing policy that backers say could spur conservation and help meet urban water needs without costly new water projects.

Responding to pleas from the Western Governors Assn. and some environmental groups, the federal agency said it will seek to expedite voluntary water transfers from those with excess water from federal dams and aqueducts to those who are water short.

In a key concession, the new guidelines allow water traders, such as financially strapped growers or irrigation districts, to keep at least part of the profit from their sale of the subsidized water.

The policy was hailed by the Environmental Defense Fund, a group interested in federal water policy, as “a real spur to efficient water use and to conservation,” said Tom Graff, a senior attorney for the group.

“By giving an entity or a person which has control over water a profit incentive, that person . . . will be more inclined to husband” his water supply, Graff said.

Graff said the new policy could encourage more water transfers, such as the historic deal announced earlier this month between the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and the Imperial Irrigation District. Their agreement will enable the MWD to buy at least 100,000 acre-feet per year of Imperial’s Colorado River water--enough to supply roughly half a million people within the six Southern California counties the giant district serves.

In return, the MWD will line canals and install other conservation improvements to keep Imperial’s water from going to waste.

Myron Holburt, the MWD’s assistant general manager, said the federal policy reflects concerns that big water projects are environmentally damaging and have become too expensive for the government to build or beneficiaries to pay for.

Existing Projects

He called it an effort by the Interior Department and its Bureau of Reclamation “to better maximize their management of existing water projects as opposed to building new ones. . . . They want to show that they’re serious about water management, and that they’re serious about expediting water transfers to meet water needs.”

While pledging to continue helping state and local agencies build water projects, the federal agency said water transfers will be “an increasingly important means of meeting Western water needs” and of “improving the efficiency” of existing projects.

Under the new policy, released earlier this month, the federal agency said it would not suggest specific transfers except in limited circumstances, such as to resolve a dispute over Indian water rights.

Although the government before had not explicitly opposed water transfers, the lack of a policy proved “an overall deterrent,” Graff said.

New Policy

The new policy may draw criticism for letting water traders profit from federally subsidized water. And some may see it as undermining support for proposed water projects.

Graff said that “if the congressional people who have been resisting this policy don’t shoot it down,” more deals like the one involving the MWD are likely in the next several years.

But a spokesman for a huge San Joaquin Valley irrigation district said he doubts that the floodgates have been opened for more big water deals.

Rob Leake, assistant public information officer for the Westlands Water District, said the district, which covers about 900 square miles of irrigable land in Fresno and Kings counties, is water short. Although some growers in the district have more water than they need, they are required to provide their surplus to those who do not have enough.

Inadequate Supply

“No district is going to let their farmers export water when there are farmers within that district who don’t have an adequate supply,” Leake said.

Leake also cited the “general reluctance” of growers to sell water, thereby creating “the perception that there are surpluses that can be utilized by urban water users.”