Snake River - Klamath River Institutional Comparison. Richard Slaughter, Ph.D. Don Reading, Ph.D. Climate Impacts Group University of Washington. Introduction. How do alternative institutional history and structures impact adaptive capacity and resource conflict resolution? OR,
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Snake River - Klamath RiverInstitutional Comparison
Richard Slaughter, Ph.D.
Don Reading, Ph.D.
Climate Impacts Group
University of Washington
Source: OSU study, p 366
Source: Snake: IWRB, BOR Flow Augmentation Study, 1999; Klamath: ESU study, p. 46
* Water right: 3,000 cfs, about 900,000 AF over 5 months
Source: OSU Klamath study
Snake River Development History
Upper Snake: 345 diversions, 41 reaches, 9 reservoirs
Water trade-off and Market Opportunity: Klamath
Source: OSU study, p. 240 (Burke)
Oregon Market Structure
Oregon Proposal for Mitigation Water Bank
Water Mitigation Bank Fund: The Department will propose that the 2001 Legislature create the authority for the Department to establish a water mitigation bank. The water bank would create a supply or "bank" of water that would be available for withdrawal by new water users to mitigate against injury to existing water rights and to protect and maintain streamflows to benefit fish and wildlife habitat. The concept promises to improve cooperative efforts among private, nonprofit and public entities for the management of surface and ground water resources. Moreover, a water mitigation bank may offer a reliable and effective regulatory framework for environmentally acceptable development of water resources.
OREGON WATER TRUSTSMITH-BARCLAY DITCH PROJECTSquaw Creek, Deschutes Basin of Central Oregon
After completion of the Eady transfer, three other water right holders (Frank and Marie Conklin, Denny and Marilyn Ebner, and Richard Mittry) sold their Smith-Barclay ditch rights to OWT. All three agreed to sell their rights to OWT in exchange for $1,000 to $1,500 an acre. One of the landowners has converted to a groundwater source, and OWT helped to facilitate this process. The application to transfer these water rights to an instream right has been approved by the Oregon Water Resources Department. Deschutes County, the Deschutes Resources Conservancy and OWT funded the purchase of these rights.
No conjunctive management
DESCHUTES WATER EXCHANGE
The DWE is an innovative, non-profit water brokerage dedicated to the restoration of streamflow in the Deschutes River. The Deschutes Water Exchange was founded to establish market infrastructure for water rights, so that both environmental and agricultural water needs can be met.
The Exchange encourages a full range of water transactions because the development of a broad market for water should result in a more efficient (and therefore less costly) means of acquiring water for instream uses. In practice, the DWE provides water-related fee-for-service assistance to private clients, investing all proceeds in the DRC mission of restoring streamflows and water quality in Deschutes Basin streams. The DWE also contributes directly to restoration initiatives, whether through its own inititative (such as the annual water leasing program or the 2003 Ochoco Irrigation District Leasing Auction) or through in-kind water rights assistance provided to the DRC or other conservation partners.
Washington Market Structure
A Water Resources Vision
A preferred future for water resource management in Washington State
Idaho Market Structure
Water Bank Conditions
The owner/lessor acknowledges the following:
1. Payment to the owner/lessor is contingent upon the sale or rental of the right from the bank.
2 While a right is in the bank, the owner of the right may not use the right even if the right is not rented.
3. A right accepted into the bank stays in the bank until the Board releases it or until the lease term expires.
4. While a water right is in the bank, forfeiture provisions are stayed.
5. Acceptance of a right into the bank does not, in itself, confirm the validity of the right or any elements of the water right.
In 2003 approximately 175,000 acre feet in the
Water Bank. However only approximately 5,000
acre feet annually are sold, rented or leased. Activity
has been increasing in recent years.
Global Rental Pool (2003)
Three checks written: administrative fee, official price, payment “under the table”
Key Elements of Difference in Adaptive Capacity