406 



to the Soil Conservation Service's Conservation Reserve Program. 

 Capitalizing conservation measures such as conversions from rill or 

 flood irrigation to sprinkler with public funds merely escalates 

 public costs, particularly as the hydropower value of the water 

 increases. 



On the other hand, while purchase of water from its uneconomic 

 agricultural uses may be the most cost-effective measure in terms 

 of hydropower value, effects on local economies may rightly place 

 limitations on its application in political practice. For example, 

 BPA has recently undertaken a pilot project near Ontario, Oregon 

 which is attempting to lease nearly 30,000 AF, currently held by 

 the Skyline Farm, for instream hydropower and fish benefits. BPA's 

 water leasing pilot provided some consideration of pending impacts 

 to labor in the community, but did not contemplate mitigation of 

 the socioeconomic impacts on the labor force and the community. As 

 a partial consequence, the pilot has encountered political 

 opposition in the local community. It thus appears that any 

 general strategy for hydropower recapture through retirement of 

 irrigated acreage will necessarily include a socioeconomic analysis 

 which addresses the job losses which may be involved, as well as a 

 mechanism to mitigate such losses. The irrigator in such cases 

 will presumably receive some market-based price for the water: it 

 is the workers who will be harmed, and whose unemployment will 

 simply add to the public costs of the water transfers. Any general 

 hydropower-oriented water transfer strategy clearly requires a 

 displaced worker component. 



By contrast, where crop value and hydropower cost-benefit ratios 

 are favorable, and a mechanism for recapture of conserved water 

 exists, the capitalization of management and labor-intensive 

 irrigation efficiencies such as scheduling could offer both 

 increased hydropower capacity for the region, as well as possible 

 job-creation and training opportunities for the local workforce. 



In addition to the obvious in-stream benefit considerations, such 

 as increased hydropower capacity, watershed restoration and flows 

 for salmon, which should place additional constraints on the 

 location of public investments in water recapture, the restoration 

 of the Basin's water quality offers another strategic objective for 

 an effective water conservation program. E.g. , ground water 

 quality contamination in the Mid-Columbia Basin has been linked by 

 Soil Conservation Districts to inefficient irrigation practices. 

 Public investment of irrigation efficiencies may in such cases be 

 motivated by water quality improvement objectives, in addition to 

 hydropower recapture and other instream benefits. 



BPA's Irriqation Policies 



Bonneville's irrigation energy pricing and related conservation 

 programs currently consist in an industry-wide pumping discount and 

 a capital subsidy program. Water Wise. In their present 



