407 



configuration the two are self-contradictory in terms of energy 

 conservation, and bear no relationship to the potential hydropower 

 values of water conservation. 



The Water Wise Program 



As we have pointed out, the goals of irrigation efficiency and 

 recapture of water for instream benefits are sometimes in conflict 

 in irrigated agriculture. Irrigation efficiencies motivated by the 

 goals of increased yields may in practice increase crop consumption 

 of water. Or the irrigator may simply apply the conserved water to 

 additional acreage, a practice known as water "spreading." 

 Similarly, energy efficiencies in the pumping and application of 

 irrigation water may entail increased crop consumption of water, 

 while reducing run-off and non-beneficial consumption. In no case 

 can the recapture of water for instream benefits be assumed as a 

 consequence of public investment in conservation of either 

 irrigation energy or water. 



Nevertheless, BPA currently spends roughly $2,000,000 annually in 

 cost-sharing agreements designed to induce energy efficiencies in 

 irrigation under the auspices of a program entitled Water Wise. 

 However, the Water Wise program, despite its title, is an energy 

 conservation program. It is the agency's vehicle for the 

 acquisition of its stated goal of 45 AMW in conservation in 

 irrigated agriculture. Not suprisingly. Water Wise fails to 

 function as an effective water conservation program. Moreover, its 

 efficacy, if not its cost-effectiveness as an energy conservation 

 program is doubtful. 



The class of irrigators most responsive to the generally increasing 

 energy costs of the past decade has been the energy-intensive 

 highlift pumping operations found on the large privately financed 

 farming operations in the Mid- and Lower Columbia Basin. Paying 

 nothing for water, these irrigators have implemented highly 

 sophisticated irrigation efficiencies in order to hold down 

 relatively high energy costs and increase yields through greater 

 efficiencies in the application of water. Such highly capitalized 

 and professionally mangaged operations would in all probability 

 have made such efficiency investments without the federal subsidy. 

 By the same token, they have had both the incentive and the ability 

 to capture a large share of BPA's energy-conservation subsidies 

 offered under the Water Wise program. 



Despite these well-known facts, BPA has historically regarded water 

 conservation as a desirable by-product of investments in energy 

 efficiency under the Water Wise program. Not suprisingly, the 

 agency has established no objectives for water conservation as 

 products of the energy conservation subsidies. Lacking any 

 mechanism for recapture of saved water, if any, and investing the 

 subsidies at points lower do*m in the dam system where the 

 hydropower potential of recaptured water would in any case be of 



8 



