On January 19th the Center for Environmental Law & Policy and Sierra Club released an economic review by a retired WSU economist that is critical of a state-funded agricultural lobby group's report that purports to justify $250 million in state-issued bond debt to expand surface water irrigation to agricultural lands eastern Washington.

“Responding to requests by local and State officials,” on January 4 the Columbia-Snake River Irrigators Association (CSRIA) announced their Review (Part 1, Part 2) of options to divert and deliver Columbia River water to irrigate lands in the Odessa Subarea in central Washington.   Funding for the analysis to expand irrigation came from the state Office of Columbia River (OCR) within the state Department of Ecology, as confirmed by OCR’s director, Derek Sandison. 

CSRIA released its report to the Washington Legislature in early January, using it to advocate that the Legislature approve $250 million in bonds to extend irrigation infrastructure to the Odessa Subarea.  It is not clear whether any state economist independently looked at and approved either the analysis or its conclusions.

To review the economics of the state-funded CSRIA report, CELP and Sierra Club turned to Norman Whittlesey, a retired professor of agricultural economics at Washington State University.  Dr. Whittlesey has more than 40 years of professional experience in irrigation development economics and water policy.  During the 1980s Whittlesey's testimony before the Legislature is credited with halting  the expansion of the federal Columbia Basin Project.  His analysis was affirmed by a U.S. Government Accountability Office review:  ratepayers and taxpayers end up shouldering most of the costs of the Columbia Basin water project, rather than irrigators.

"Water is precious, and our tax dollars are scarce," said Dave Monthie of Olympia, a water lawyer and CELP Board member.  "With the Legislature cutting social programs to the bone, and with the potential for cutting the capital budget for education, transportation and other building projects, the state owes it to taxpayers to insist that the federal government pay for any expansion of the Columbia Basin Project, rather than siphoning millions of state dollars to eastern Washington water projects based on deceptive economic analyses."

Dr. Whittlesey’s review notes multiple errors and basic deficiencies in CSRIA's economic analysis, including improper use of inflation and discount rates and failure to accurately account for foregone hydropower costs.  The report is unclear on who will pay for expensive surface irrigation expansion, and Whittlesey concludes that, based on his experience, “it is highly likely that the State or Federal taxpayer would have to provide considerable subsidies . . . .”  

Whittlesey cautions decision-makers, “State funds directed toward irrigation development should never be spent on the basis of such an analysis.”   He recommends that the State, should it wish to invest in expanding surface water irrigation, require an independent evaluation “of the true benefits and costs to the state and region …  In these difficult economic times the state taxpayer deserve such careful consideration by our elected representatives.”

Additional background

In 2006 Washington State decided to pursue a course to “aggressively pursue the development of water supplies.”  (90.90 RCW)  The “Columbia Dams Bill” was vigorously opposed by eastern Washington conservation voices, anticipating the onslaught of new dam proposals. Those concerns have been realized, with tens of millions of dollars wasted on proposals for dams in unsuitable locations, including Lower Crab Creek, the Similkameen River, and Black Rock Valley.

Funded with millions of dollars, the new Office of the Columbia River (OCR) within the Washington Dept of Ecology has emerged as a small army of dam-planners and the state’s equivalent of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.   Accountability for public monies has been absent.

One case study is the Odessa Subarea, located in central Washington just east of Moses Lake. 

During the 1940s, farmers voted to reject federal water from the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project.  Over the years some farmers put in thousands of uncased, illegal “cascading” wells and began pumping groundwater to irrigate.   The water is ancient, and the aquifers do not “recharge”.    In the early 1970s economists warned the farmers and the state that the water was limited to about 30 years:  the farmers should amortize their investments and transition to dryland wheat farming.   But pumping continued, mining ancient waters from the basalt aquifers.  Groundwater levels have dropped – as predicted. 

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has long attempted to reverse the rejection of “project water” by farmers in the 1940s, and expand the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project into the Odessa.   Part of the Bureau’s expansion effort is being carried out through the Odessa Subarea Special Study – (being done jointly with the state’s OCR) to replace groundwater pumping with federal “project” water pumped from the Columbia River.   Conservationists have criticized the Bureau for the federal agency's lack of transparency, spending over $12 million dollars in federal and state monies developing a plan that is bad for taxpayers and the environment.  

The Bureau anticipates releasing its decision on the Odessa in late spring, 2012.

Odessa Economics

    - Norman Whittlesey.  Odessa Subarea surface water supply alternatives by CSRIA:  comments on economic features.  Jan. 2012

    - Norman Whittlesey and Walt Butcher.  Expansion will not resolve Odessa woes (Capital Press Dec 30, 2010

    - Norman Whittlesey, Walter Butcher and M.E. Marts:  Water Project Subsidies: how they develop and grow

    - U.S. Government Accountability Office:  Water Resources - Issues Concerning Expanded Irrigation in the Columbia Basin Project

    - Norman Whittlesey, Walter Butcher:  comments on Bureau's EA for Lake FDR drawdown

    - Joel R. Hamilton, A Review of “The Economic Impact of a Possible Irrigation-Water Shortage in Odessa Sub- Basin: Potato Production and Processing”, Sanjoy Bhattacharjee and David Holland, School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University, June 6, 2005.

Columbia River Flows & Fish

    - National Academies of Science: Managing the Columbia River: Instream Flows, Water Withdrawals, and Salmon Survival

Odessa Groundwater

    - Rachael Paschal Osborn:  Odessa Aquifers:  Crisis in Sustainability

Odessa Subarea Special Study

    - CELP:  Odessa Subarea Special Study

    - USBR:  Odessa Subarea Special Study

    - CELP et al comments on the Odessa DEIS

    - Office of Columbia River (Dept of Ecology)

Weber Siphon

    - Weber Siphon & the Columbia Basin Project

    - Letter to Interior Sec. Salazar

    - Letter to the Office of the Inspector General

Expanding Federal Irrigation to the Odessa Subarea

- Economics -

Norman Whittlesey and Walter Butcher are retired professors of agricultural economics from Washington State University and each have more than 40 years of professional experience in the fields of irrigation development economics and water policy.

Walter Butcher            Norman Whittlesey