Washington Un~ive.z'sity

Issue Brief  %    

 
 

nive sitr of MiSSOUl'l

1

olu

u;IIiaflii1Iar«II«

     


SERVICE‘    < 
L"3F‘ARY 0"“ 010- 0386077

                               

NGRESVSIONAL
 numii

               

CONGRESS’ ,

 

WATER RESOURCES: CONSERVATION IN IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE

ISSUE BRIEF NUMBER IB77072

AUTHOR:
Viessman, Warren, Jr.
senior Specialist, Water Resources Development
Denoncada, Christine

Office of Senior Specialists

THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE

MAJOR ISSUES SYSTEM

DATE ORIGINATED ggggggzz
DATE UPDATED gggggggg

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CALL 287-5700

0820

CRS- 1 IB77072 UPDATE-08/20/80

T §Q§-2§El!l$lQ!

Irrigation of commercial food crops, while contributing to the $20-25
billion annual export of agricultural products, is the largest single
depletor of water in the United States. In 1976, about 80% of the Nation's
total water consumption was attributed to irrigated agriculture. California,
Idaho, Nebraska, and Texas rank among the highest water users, with
California leading, using as much as twice the amount of water on its 9
million acres as any other state. These four states consume 87% of the
energy used in irrigation. In addition, over uo% of all energy consumed in
farm-level food production was used for pumping. A reduction in irrigation
water use of even 10% (conservative) could free enormous quantities of water
for other beneficial purposes. The commensurate savings in energy would be a
positive side-effect. some analysts see such a program in the context of the
development of a comprehensive national water policy which embodies and
provides for implementation of a practical conservation ethic. The principal
costs and constraints of an irrigation conservation program involve the
difficulty of altering such institutions as property rights (water and land),
organizational structures, and long-standing social customs.

u§A§§§EQQ!2-A!2_2QLICZ-AHALI§l§

The drought of 1976-77 focused attention on water supply problems in
expansive areas of the western and Plains States. In truth, however, the
drought was not the real culprit, but rather an amplifier of a serious
n ;ional problem that has been intensifying for years. The basic issue is
how to allocate scarce water resources among the needs for environmental
enhancement and recreation, food and energy production, and municipal and
industrial water supplies. ‘

Historic trends in water resources development in the United States have
been strongly influenced by provincial desires and an ardent belief in the
sanctity of individual water rights. This has fostered the generation of
almost impregnable institutions which were adequate in their day, but are now
seen by many as major constraints to efficient allocation and management of
limited water supplies. Superimposed on this structure is the philosophy
that "when the well runs dry," new sources will be forthcoming. This
optimism, combined with a dominant concern for the present over the future,
has often relegated the practice of water conservation to the arena of ideals
rather than to the field of practical application. with unlimited water
resources, a tradition of wasteful practices might be acceptable, but today's
intense demands for fresh water shatter the illusion that the supply is
unlimited.

The Water Resources Council reports in its publication "The Nation's Water
Resources 1975-2000" (vol. I, summary: p. 36) that:

In 1975, irrigation water withdrawals were 158.7 bgd,

and consumptive use was 86.4 bgd [83% of the total water
consumed]. Withdrawals are projected to decline somewhat
as a result of ground-water overdraft in the Southwest
and some increase in irrigation efficiency elsewhere.
Consumption, however, is projected to increase slightly.

CRS- 2 IB77072 UPDATE-08/20/80

In 1975, irrigation accounted for 81 percent of the total
water consumed by the Nation, and the California Region used
almost one-third of the total water consumed by irrigation.
It should be pointed out that since the data were compiled
for this report there has been a significant increase in
irrigated cropland in the South Alantic-Gulf Region.

In terms of the 1976-1977 drought, immediately implementable pmeasures to
increase water supplies are limited. Host options are confined to’ managing,
reallocating, and redistributing existing sources,m and establishing
priorities for needs. In the long run, the two principal avenues of relief
are additional development and reduction in use. The former has been the
traditional approach, while the latter has been, a much talked about but
rarely exercised alternative. Yet large quantities of water are known to be
wasted and opportunities abound for meeting many projected needs through
conservation rather than through new development. The most promising water
conservation candidate is irrigated agriculture.

Irrigation, a costly enterprise, is the largest single depletor of water
in the United States. States approximates. Current irrigated land 05
million acres, or about one-sixth of all land farmed. In the Missouri River
Basin, for example, year 2000 estimates of depletions by irrigated
agriculture range up to 23 million acrefeet (HAP) per year. In contrast,
even the highest estimates of annual depletions from energy resource
development in that region are less than 3 MAP.

The following is a table of total irrigation water withdrawals and
consumption by region:

CRS- 3

IB77072

Irrigation fresh—water withdrawals

and consumption--1975,

1985, 2000

[million gallons per day]

Water resources
region and no.

New England (1)
Mid—Atlantic (2)

South Atlantic-Gulf (3)
Great Lakes (4)

Ohio (5)

Tennessee (6)

Upper Mississippi (7)
Lower Mississippi (8)
Souris-Red-Rainy (9)
Missouri (10)
Arkansas-White-Red (11)
Texas-Gulf (12)

Rio Grande (13)

Upper Colorado (14)
Lower Colorado (15)
Great Basin (16)

Pacific Northwest (17),

California (18)
TOTAL, REGIONS 1-18
Alaska (19)

«Hawaii (20)

Caribbean (21)
TOTAL, REGIONS 1-21

Water resources
region and no.

New England (1)
Mid—Atlantic (2)

South Atlantic-Gulf (3)
Great Lakes (4)

Ohio (5)

Tennessee (6)

Upper Mississippi (7)
Lower Mississippi (8)
Souris-Red-Raily (9)
Missouri (10)
Arkansas-White-Red (11)
Texas-Gulf (12)

Rio Grande (13)

Upper Colorado (14)
Lower Colorado (15)
Great Basin (16)
Pacific Northwest (17)
California (18)

TOTAL, REGIONS 1-18
Alaska (19)

1975

35

265
3,464
1u5

47

1a

192
4,580
46
31,636
9,980
11,533
5,684
6,400
7,989
6,969
33,131
-35 911
156,776
a
1,uu7

158,743

1975

25

196
2,752
114

37

11

153
3,065
37
14,214
7,048
9,347
3,886
2,194
4,026
3,225
11,026
Zfl;Z§Z
85,638

Withdrawals

1985

41

366'

u,ooa
211

68

18

283
4,559
1un
39,376
10,483
9,333
5,u93
7,223
7,299
6,120
34,639
-§fii§§§
164,532
a

1,226

166,252

Consumption

1985

29

269
3,184
169

53

14

230
3,204
116
17,597
7,468
7,597
3,920
2,657
3,962
3,082
13,362
222133
92,047
3

UPDATE-08/20/80

2000

46

481
4,509
282

91

21

387
4,444
434
836,236
9,776
7,427
4,873
6,672
6,343
5,825
29,961
_§fliZ§fl
152,572
4

951

153,846

2000

33
354

3,5973

232

74

17

323
3,272
350
17,607
7,125
6,100
3,570
2,741
3,720
3,196
13,213
Zéiéll
91,835

cRs- 4 1377072 UPDATE-O8/20/80
Hawaii (20) u7u 481 473

Caribbean (21) ___gz§ ___g§g ___1g§
TOTAL, REGIONS 1-21 86,391 92,820 92,506

SOURCE: The Nation's Water Resources, 1975-2000. The Water,
Resources Council, vol. 1, summary: 37.

  cns- 5 1377072 UPDATE-O8/20/80

Estimates of water savings obtainable through improved efficiencies in
irrigation water management generally range between 20 and 50%. A very
« uservative reduction of 10% in agricultural water use in the Missouri River

nbasin could, according to CBS, yield savings of about 1.5 MAP annually

g;thggt_gdgg;§§_;gpagt_on crop_yig;Q§. A reduction of even 1 MAP in that
basin would free enough water for most projected energy development needs.

There are approximately 45 million acres of irrigated farmland, 79% of
which lies in 11 states. These 11 states and the amounts of water they apply
to these lands are:

CRS- 6

IB77072 UPDATE-O8/20/80

Source of Irrigation Water Reported by Farms as a
Percent of Total Water Used for Irrigation - 1969

Texas
Nebraska
Kansas
Arizona
New Hexico
California
Washington
Oklahoma
Idaho
Colorado
Oregon

Texas
Nebraska
Kansas
Arizona
New Mexico
California
Washington
Oklahoma
Idaho
Colorado
Oregon

Texas
Nebraska
Kansas
Arizona
New Mexico
California
Washington
Oklahoma
Idaho
Colorado
Oregon

§22£e2e

22.3
25.2
5.3
07.7
31.0
50.9
30.2
10.1
75.5
72.0
37.5

!922l-Asre

3,200,000
5,301,000
3,032,150
1,150,000
1,059,500
9,099,035
1,510,500

901,220
0,031,070
3,100,000

_l22§§.2QQ

00,507,275

Weighted
§!§£§9§_

1.5
1.83
1.5
5.5
2.5
3.17
3.8
1.33
2.5
1.08
2.83

QEQEQQ

77.7
74.8
93.7
52.3
68.6
39.1
15.8
85.9
23.4
27.6
12.4

Avg Acre-Ft
_-B§£.A2£2.

1.5
1.83
1.5
5.5
2.5
3.17
3.8
1.33
2.5
1.08
2.83

"1
I5‘
10
Kb

2.58
3.29
4.23
1.47
2.69
1.12
3.10

Acre-Feet of Water Applied Per Acre

2212252 Qrgeaizeé
33.0 15.5
73.5 21.0
95.0 0.0
50.5 05.0
75.3 20.2
09.0 50.5
29.5 70.5
90.5 5.5
35.1 50.9
53.2 05.3
09.7 50.3

Total Acre-Feet of Water Applied by State

Total Acre—Ft
-_lNi;li93§L.

12.30
11.53
0.55
5.33
I 2.57
23.30
5.10
1.25
10.20
3.35
-§.§3
92.70

Seriakler
1.25
1.57
1.25
0.00
2.05
2.53
3.33
1.13
2.15
0.90
2.03

SOURCE: The Analysis to Develop a Program for Energy Conservation
in Irrigated Agriculture.

Pacific Northwest Laboratory, pp. 9, 17, 16.

CRS- 7 IB77072 UPDATE-O8/20/80

On the national scene, the prospects for water savings are optimistic. In
1976, total withdrawals of water in the contiguous United States for all uses
re about 400 HAP with about 50% attributed to irrigation; during that same
year, total depletions ammounted to about 125 HAP with irrigated agriculture
accounting for almost 80%. Small percentage reductions in such large
quantities of water can be substantial; it follows that if extensive gains

(are to be made through conservation, irrigation water use is the logical

point to begin. Again, conservatively estimating a 10% reduction, savings of
about 20 MAP in water withdrawn annually and 10 MAP in water depleted might
be expected. In contrast, a White House Drought Study Group (1977) estimated
potential savings in water withdrawals by irrigated agriculture of no to 50
MAP per year and about 8 MAP per year in depletions through a comprehensive
conservation program. The importance of these figures is illustrated by the
fact that the average annual flow of the water-short Upper Colorado River
Basin is only about 15 HAP per year and that of the Missouri River Basin (the
Nation's largest) is about 52 HAP annually.

On the energy side of the ledger, estimates of the potential for reduction
in use of energy by irrigated agriculture range up to 50%. On the basis of
comprehensive studies in Iowa and Nebraska, it would appear that by:

- increasing irrigation pumping plant efficiency,

- use of improved scheduling procedures,

—~ reducing water application according to field-determined

need,

- improved management of electric pumping plants,

- reuse of irrigation runoff water, and

-- improved irrigation system design,

about no to H5 billion kilowatt hours equivalent of electrical energy could
be saved nationally each year. Converting this to barrels of crude oil, the
savings would be on the order of 22 to 26 million barrels per year.
Presently, the energy savings which might. be realized in the irrigated
agriculture sector constitute about 10% of the 1976 installed hydroelectric
capacity in the entire United States (Alaska included) or about 1.5% of all
electricity generated in this country. Currently, 79%  of irrigable land
resides within 11 states. Thus, it is not surprising to learn that these
particular states utilize 87% of the total energy outlay for irrigation.

The common-property character of ‘water has thus far constrained
implementation of conservation practices. Changes in institutions such as
property rights (water and land), organizational structures, and
long-standing social customs would appear to be necessary to effect
systematic conservation on the scale discussed, but incremental changes could
be made for new developments with minimal disruption of current policies and
practices and even existing systems could be modified short of massive
changes in water (rights systems. For example, loans by Farmers Home

(Administration to finance private irrigation development could carry a

restriction requiring that new facilities be designed and operated using the

(best available conservation practices. Specific obstacles include:

-- the lack of a comprehensive national water policy,

-- the prevailing body of water law,

—-the failure to recognize the interrelationship between
surface and groundwaters,

-- the lack of appropriate institutions for managing
regional and interstate water resources,

CRS- 8 13770 72 UPDATE-O 8/20/80

-- the lack of incentives for generating widespread
implementation of conservation practices,

-- the failure to establish a price for water which is
commensurate with the value of its use, and

—- the pervasive "pump it today-let tommorrow take
care of itself" attitude.

While the establishment of a meaningful conservation orientation in water
management programs would not be a simple task, timely incremental action
could bring about change in new water development endeavors and, set the
strategy for modifying existing operations. A host of well-known
conservation tactics can be considered. These include:

-- incentives in the form of subsidies, tax relief, and
increased earnings for implementation of proven conservation
practices,

-- economic measures such as pricing policies, taxation,
and fines,

-- regulation of new developments and operating procedures
for existing developments,

-— institutional designs which translate the conservation
ethic into operational elements,

--structura1 modification of existing Federal facilities, and

-- modification of current operating practices.

other methods by which irrigation water management could be improved
include: curtailing the development of irrigation in areas of high salt
yield; restricting the use of chemicals and fertilizers; incorporating
devices to control surface runoff; raising water user charges (see table
below); including a fee for water quality degradation; and amending western
water laws.

CRS- 9 IB77072 UPDATE’O8/20/80

Value of Irrigation Water For The Major
Irrigated Regions of the Western United
States, 1969.*

Region Value ($/A.F.)
Snake-Columbia Basin 3.88
Central California 5.14
Desert Southwest 14.45
Upper Colorado Basin 6.53
Upper Rio Grande Basin 2.31
Lover Rio Grande Plain 1u.uu
Upper Hissouri Basin 5.uo
Northwestern Ogallala 15.2u
Northeastern Ogallala B 11.27
Central Ogallala 2H.35
Southern Ogallala 5.98

Based on regional mean values and project prices in 1969.

SOURCE: Legal, Institutional and Social Aspects of Irrigation
and Drainage and Water Resources Planning and
Management, ASCE Proceedings. 1979. p. 576.

CBS-10 IB77072 UPDATE-08/20/80

President Carter's Water Policy Initiatives of June 6, 1978 (House Doc.
No. 95-307) included recommendations for: a new, national emphasis on
conservation; cost sharing; planning procedures; and environmental
protection. Greater significance would be given to the improvement OL
irrigation repayment and water service contract procedures under existing
authorities of the Bureau of Reclamation (BR). Changes in pricing policies
will, however, take time to become effective and to have any (measurable
impact. The June 6 message also called attention to the problem of ground
water depletion by directing the Departments of Agriculture and Interior,
through their agricultural assistance programs (grants and loans), to
encourage conservation rather than overextension. The Initiatives also
addressed the general inefficient use of water. Recommendations to combat
this mismanagement included: pricing, technical assistance, and Federal
program reforms.

Reduction in water use through conservation will require the modification
of existing systems, but this process could result in expenditures far beyond
the owner's ability to pay. The President's proposals need to be expedited
cautiously if great hardships and expense are to be avoided.

The following laws were enacted during the 95th Congress:

P.L. 95-18 (S. 925). The Temporary Drought Authority. The Act provides
temporary authorities to the Secretary of Interior to mitigate the impacts of
the 1976-77 drought. It was enacted on.Apr. 7, 1977.

P.L. 95-192 (H.R. 75/6. 106). The Soil and Water Resources Conservation
Act of 1977. fime Act provides for furthering the conservation, protection
and enhancement of the Nation's land, water,’ and related resources fc-
sustained use. On Nov. 18, 1977, the measure was signed into law (91 Stat.
1007).

P.L. 95-226 (H.R. 10532). This law authorizes the Secretary of the
Interior to allow continuation and completion of construction undertaken dto
mitigate the effects of the 1976-77 drought where unanticipated and
unavoidable circumstances prevented completion before Jan. 31, 1978.
Directed the Secretary to report to the President and Congress on emergency

actions taken to mitigate the effects of the 1976-77 drought no later than’

May 1, 1978. It was signed into law on Feb. 7, 1978.

LEGISLATION

H.R. 032 (Hansen)

Amends the acreage limitation and residency requirements of the 1902
Reclamation Law. Maintains federal ‘reclamation projects which yield
irrigation benefits. Introduced Jan. 15, 1979; referred to Committee on
Interior and Insular Affairs.

H.R. 2509 (Sebelius)

Authorizes the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin program in Kansas to provif
water for some 30,000 acres of irrigable land as defined by section 4 of H.R.
3393. Seeks to«clarify federal reclamation laws by promoting family farms in
federal irrigation projects and maintaining the necessity of a prosperous
rural society. Title III spells out the water rights on excess lands.

CBS-11 IB77072 UPDATE-O8/20/80

Introduced Feb. 28, 1979; referred to Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs.

H.R. 4260 (Bedell)

Prohibits water usage from specific federal reclamation projects for
surplus crop irrigation within 10 years of a project's completion under this
bill. Introduced May 31, 1979; referred to Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs.

5. 1a (Church et al.)

The "Reclamation Reform Act of 1979." Extends the acreage limitation from
160 acres to a maximum size of 1,280 acres.b Has been met with stiff
opposition from the Carter Administration for many reasons, paramount being
that the Administration feels it undermines the intention of the 1902
Reclamation Act and furnishes cheap federal water to additional lands (see
Report No. 96-235). Introduced Jan. 15, 1979; referred to Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.

5. 633 (McClure et al.)
The "Farm Water Act of 1979." Promotes the fiscal integrity of federal

water projects, providing irrigation benefits. Promotes payment of water
charges and construction costs. Introduced Mar. 31, 1979; referred to

icommittee on Energy and Natural Resources.

3. 718 (Nelson, 6. et al.)

The "Reclamation Lands Family Farm Act.” Encourages settlement of family
farms in federal irrigation projects. Title IV deals with excess lands and
irrigation rights. Introduced Mar. 21, 1979; referred to Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources.

EEABlE§§

Five hearings were held related to water conservation during the 95th
Congress. The House Agriculture Committee held hearings on H.R. 75 on Mar.
1, 1977. The House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs held hearings
on H.R. 5117 on Mar. 23, 1977. Hearings on S. 925 were held on Mar. 8, 1977
by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. This Committee also
held hearings on the Yakima Valley Drought on Mar. 2, 1977 and on National
Water Policy on Mar. 31, 1977.

U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Agriculture.
Conservation and Credit Subcommittee; and Committee on
Science and Technology. Natural Resources and
Environment Subcommittee. Hearings, 96th Congress,
1st session. July 25,H26, 1979. Hearings on
agricultural productivity and environmental quality.

U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources. Drought Authority. Hearings, 95th Congress,
1st session, on S. 925. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off.,
1977. 34 p.

B§2QBI§_

Drought Relief and Water Conservation Act.

cRs—12 11377072 UPDATE-O 3/2o/so

A!2-§QE§B§§§lQ!AL-2QQQ!BN2§
In Extensions of
Congressional record [daily
E7290-E7291.

Remarks of George Miller.
ed.] v. 123, Dec. 6, 1977:

Providing for emergency drought relief measures. Remarks of

0.5.

U.S.

U.S.

U.S.

U.S.

U.S.

Hr. needs. Congressional record [daily ed.] v. 12H,
Jan. 30, 1978: H36n.
Congress. House. Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

Providing temporary authorities to the Secretary of the ,
Interior to facilitate emergency actions to mitigate the
impacts of the 1976-77 drought; Washington, U.s. Govt.
Print. Off., Apr. 1, 1977. 13 p. (95th Congress, 1st
session. House. Report no. 95-155)

Agriculture. Soil

Act of 1977; report together
cost estimate to accompany
Print. Off., 1977. 25 p.
Report no. 95-3uu)

Congress. House. Committee on
and Water Resources Conservation
with Congressional Budget Office
H.R. 75. Washington, U.S. Govt.
(95th Congress, 1st session. House-

Congress. Senate. Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,

and Forestry. Land and Water Resources Conservation Act

of 1977; report to accompany S. 106.‘ Washington, U.S.

Govt. Print. Off., 1977. 1Q p. (95th Congress, 1st session.
Senate. Report no. 95-59)

House. Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs. Amending P.L. 95-18, providing for emergency
drought relief measures. Report to accompany H.R. 10532.
Jan. 30, 1978. 6 p. (95th Congress, 2d session. House.
Report no. 95-854)

Congress.

Congress. House. Message from the President of the United

States. Federal Water Policy Initiatives. House Document
No. 95-3u7. U.S. Govt. Print. Off., Washington, D.C., June
6, 1978.

Congress. Senate. Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources. Emergency drought authcrity; report to accompany
S. 925. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1977. 7 p.

(95th Congress, 1st session. Senate. Report no. 95-50)

Senate. Committee on Interior and Insular
Water resources of the Missouri River Basin. 7.
Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print.

Congress.
Affairs.
9flth Congress, 2d session.
Off., Nov. 1976, 249 p.

At head of title: Committee print.

§E§QEQLQ§X_QE-§!EE1§

N/A

CRS-13 IB77072 UPDATE-08/20/80

The analysis to develop a program for energy conservation in
irrigated agriculture. Pacific northwest laboratory.
NTIS, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Springfield, Va.
September 1978. 77 p.

Beak, Henry B.R. A comparison of evaluations of four irrigation
projects. Growth and Change. v. 9. July 1978: 22-28.

The drip that lets the desert bloom. Business Weekly. No. 2364,
Jan. 20, 1975: 30n-30p.

Dvoskin, D., K. Nicol, and E.0. Heady. Energy use for irrigation
in the seventeen western States. Ames, Iowa, Center for
Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University,
1975. 39 p.

Efficiency of sprinkle irrigation leads to water rights
problems. The ground water newsletter. v. 8,
I10. 5'  16'  “-50

Gilley, J.R., and D.G. Watts. Energy reduction through improved
irrigation practices. Lincoln, Nebraska, Agricultural
Experiment Station, University of Nebraska, 1976. 26 p.

Irrigation, water use, and management work plan. A report to

be developed by the Technical Work Group for: the Interagency
Task Force on Irrigation Efficiencies, December 1977.

Note: this report is scheduled for completion in
September 1978, and is a joint effort by the U.S. Departments
of Interior and Agriculture and EPA. Comments, suggestions,
and inquiries should be sent to Sheldon G. Boone, Chairman,
Technical Work Group, Cooperative Irrigation Study, P.O. Box
25007, Denver, Colorado 80225.

Lane, D.D., P.E. Fischback, and N.C. Teter. Energy uses in
Nebraska agriculture. Lincoln, Nebraska, Extension Services,
University of Nebraska, report CC 255, 1973. 35 p.

Marsh, Dr. Albert. Drip irrigation. Irrigation journal.
nay/June 1979: 1a, 15, 18-21.

Shoji, Kobe Drip irrigation. Scientific American, v. 237,
November 1977: 62-68.

Sloggett, Gordon. Energy and U.S. agriculture: irrigation
pumping, 1970. Washington economicrresearch service, U.S.
Dept. of Agriculture, 1977. 39 p.

 Agricultura1 Economic Report no. 376

Splinter, William E. Center-pivot i:rigation.i Scientific
America, v. 23H, June, 1976: 90-99.

U.S. Dept. of the Interior. Critical water problems facing the

U.S.

CRS-14 IB77072 UPDATE-O8/20/80

eleven western States. [Washington] 1975. H57-p.
could be

General Accounting Office. More and better uses
irrigation

made of billions of gallons of water by improving
delivery systems. Departments of Agriculture and the Interior;
report to the Congress by the Comptroller General of the

United states. [Washington] For sale by the U.S. General
Accounting Office, Sept. 2, 1977. an p.

National Water Commission. New directions in U.S. watery
policy: Summary, conclusions and recommendations.
[Washington, for sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. Govt. Print.
Off., 1973] 197 p.

Water Resources Council.
[Washington] 1977. 195 p.

Nationwide analysis summary.

The Nation's Water Resources:
Second National Water Assessment,

Water Resources Council.
1975-2000, v. 1, summary.
D.C. December 1978.

Watts, Darrell G. Agricultural Water Supply: the role of water

[in the energy crisis. Lincoln, Nebraska, Water Resources
Research Institute, University of Nebraska, 1973, 13 p.

‘ _ _fl_,‘.§..3_,......_ N __ _ ....;_;-_.:.:,~_;;>4_;;s_.;;.3;tIa,\¢» V74 ‘. __..._.———— 
1 1,3§3R:;3e.R‘Y
‘ 13* 

x — I \ ‘. gt :1 1-3?‘ ' 

; ?J".,;§',.1'5:;_":’-H*EF*=;= ~‘K.:.5-"Q N

f E ;§-":._‘‘;,' 1. —‘ i
 '

V ,» 41-vs,-s‘_ ;-‘-'—;':'~''»'’ "A" V