The Washington State Department of Ecology wants irrigators to relinquish some of their water rights for conserving wate

by S. C.

The Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) is considering legislation for the 2010 legislative session that would force irrigators to relinquish some of their Columbia River water rights for conserving water through Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Water Conservation Programs.

Irrigators had proposed that Ecology allow half of water the conserved through O&M practices to be used to irrigate more land, while the rest of the conserved water from the irrigators water rights would be put into the river to benefit fish.

The irrigators, who are initially proposing a O&M Water Conservation pilot program for six farms, want the program to be open to water users who already have adopted practices to conserve water.

However, representatives of the Washington State Department of Ecology's Office of the Columbia River are indicating that water users who have conserved water will have to relinquish it and no longer have a right to it.

On the other hand, the irrigators say that Washington State water law specifically exempts relinquishment of water saved from O&M Water Conservation practices that are based on seasonal water use.

Many experts widely agree that using O&M Water Conservation practices and techniques (i.e...soil moisture probes, weather monitoring, and irrigation scheduling) can conserve a substantial amount of water.

According to Mark Nielson, Manager of the Benton Conservation District and of the Franklin Conservation District in Washington State, using techniques such as soil moisture probes, weather monitoring and irrigation scheduling can cut water used for irrigation by about 17.3 percent.

Additionally, a Kansas study found that irrigation scheduling reduced water use by 20% while also reducing energy, fertilizer, and labor costs. The study evaluated AgriMet, a meteorological data collection system operated by the USBR in the Pacific Northwest region. A consulting firm in eastern Oregon that incorporates AgriMet weather data into local crop models found that users of the service reduced their water and energy use by about 15% (Dokter 1996). Kranz et al. (1992) found that irrigation scheduling reduced the applied water by 11% and energy use by 17% while improving yields by 3.5%. Likewise, a consulting firm in Washington using AgriMet to provide irrigation scheduling and soil moisture monitoring services to farmers found that some farmers reduced their water and energy use by as much as 50%, while others farmers were under-irrigating their fields. For those under-irrigating, irrigation scheduling increased both water use and yields (Dokter 1996).

The irrigators are also indicating that significant investments have to be made on an annual basis to do an O&M Water Conservation program and they don't understand why the Washington State Department of Ecology wants to penalize them for conserving water. For example, a study examining irrigation scheduling on corn found that costs associated with irrigation scheduling, e.g., irrigation scheduling supplies, labor, and the cost for
pumping plant adjustment, totaled around $15 per acre (Kranz et al. 1992). Using private irrigation consultants, moisture probes, sensors, weather instruments and meters, to determine the soil moisture profile and water uptake can further increase annual costs. Costs for the above mentioned types of services average $30-$40 per acre annually.

Many water conservation experts are concerned that if irrigators are penalized by the Department of Ecology for using soil moisture probes, weather monitoring and irrigation scheduling, irrigators will be very reluctant to do O&M Water Conservation practices. "This is bad public policy," stated John Anderson, Senior Fellow of the Water Conservation
Institute. "Government agencies need to be encouraging irrigators and farmers to conserve water, not punishing them."