Water and Water Quality i" 



The forest-range environment is closely re- 

 lated to the Nation's supply of water. Many of 

 the major streams in the United States orig- 

 inate in the mountain range lands and flow 

 hundreds of miles to other forest-range eco- 

 systems. Some of the regions are major sup- 

 pliers of water, others contribute more sediment 

 than others, and a few of the drainage areas are 

 internal basin drainages. Some range-lands are 

 high water yielding areas; others have the 

 potential to yield more water through changed 

 management or investment. Some ranges are 

 sources of floods, and some are sources of silt 

 that reduces water quality. 



Great variations exist in precipitation, evapo- 

 transpiration, runoff, and streamflow among the 

 regions of the country. These variations are 

 further complicated by seasonal and annual 

 variations and by precipitation, evapotranspira- 

 tion, and runoff. 



Water is in some ways a unique resource. 

 It is not readily or cheaply distributed and it 

 is not bought and sold in national markets. It 

 may be either a final (consumer's) good or an 

 intermediate (producer's) good. It may be used 

 at or near the site of its production or at a 

 great distance downstream. Furthermore, not 

 all uses "consume" the water — hence, the pro- 

 jection of uses in terms of both "withdrawal" 

 and "consumptive use." Because of its unique 

 characteristics and the lack of national markets, 

 "Water supply problems are often local, some- 

 times regional, but seldom national in scope." 

 (Water Resources Council, 1968.) 



Water as a product of rangeland may supple- 

 ment or complement other uses or products of 

 the land. Interproduct relationships that are 

 supplementary or complementary should be 

 fully exploited. Competitive conditions may 

 exist and choices must be made. Where the 

 relationship is competitive, a balance will have 

 to be achieved — or a decision made on what 

 parts of which range ecosystems are to be 

 devoted primarily to management for water 

 objectives. Some rangeland areas can and 

 should be devoted to management designed pri- 

 marily to yield additional water or to protect 

 or improve water quality. 



Not only are Americans concerned about hav- 

 ing enough water in the future, they are also 

 concerned about having "clean" water. Quality 

 as well as quantity is a concern. 



From the point of view of this analysis, the 

 management level applied to range ecosystems 

 can have explicit effects on both water quantity 

 and water quality. Because of its uniqueness, 



" Unless otherwise noted the data and context used in 

 this data on water are based on the report of the U.S. 

 Water Resource Council titled "The Nation's Water 

 Resources," Washington, D.C. 1968. 



however, the primary concern of water data 

 in this analysis is on quality. 



Sediment in stream channels is one of the 

 quantitative measurements available in the cur- 

 rent analysis. It is used as a measurement of 

 water quality. Many of the forest-range ecosys- 

 tems, particularly some members of the West- 

 ern Range ecogroup, are major contributors of 

 sediment to streams and stream channels. 

 Minor decreases in the yield of water would be 

 acceptable in some sections of the Great Plains 

 and the Southeast, given higher supply relative 

 to consumptive uses. 



The Water Resources Council has estimated 

 future water requirements on both a national 

 and regional basis. Their projections have been 

 based on explicit assumptions about greatly 

 increased efficiency of water use, changes in 

 technology, adjustments in price relationships, 

 and potentials for substitution of other input 

 factors — as well as increased population and 

 economic activity. Their look ahead indicates 

 that even with increased in-plant recycling, a 

 large increase in reuse of water will be re- 

 quired. Investments in water development, wa- 

 ter conditioning, waste treatment, and water 

 mianagement will be necessary. 



On a national basis, withdrawals are expected 

 to increase faster than consumptive use (fig. 

 32). Between 1965 and 2000 withdrawals will 

 essentially triple, and they will almost double 

 between 1965 and 1980. Consumptive use of 

 water is expected to increase over the 1965 level 

 by 1.23 times in 1980 and 1.65 times in 2000. 

 In 1965 consumptive use was 29 percent of 

 withdrawals ; by the year 2000 it is expected to 

 be 16 percent (table 8). 



Table 8 — Withdmivals and consumptive use 



of tvater for the United States ^ 



(Millions of gallons daily) 



Year 



Withdrawals 



Consumptive Use 



1965 (actual) 



1980 (projected) __ 

 2000 (projected) __ 



269,617 

 442,626 

 804,610 



77,782 

 104,418 

 128,206 



^ The Water Resources Council projections of water 

 requirements are based on a higher level of assumed 

 population growth (Bureau of Census Projection Series 

 "B") than now seems likely. Data used for the general 

 outlook of this report assumed population projection 

 Series "D". 



Needs for additional water will grow fastest 

 in the Southeast and the Northeast. Relative 

 importance of the regions will shift between 

 1965 and 2000. The West now makes the great- 

 est share of all national withdrawals, but by 

 the year 2000 the Northeast will withdraw 

 more water than will the West. The predicted 



50 



