An analysis of irrigated agricultural outcomes under the prior appropriation doctrine: hypotheses and applications

Abstract

This article measures irrigated agricultural outcomes under the prior appropriation doctrine by developing a model of farmers' land allocations in response to water supply change. The modelling approach considers the institutional factors of water rights and permits the inclusive determination of water and land allocations. We utilize farm-level data of irrigated agriculture in Water District #1 in Idaho to examine the predictions from our theoretical model. The water rights priority date is consolidated at the farm level and used to differentiate farmers' responses. We test a set of hypotheses that relate to water supply and crop revenue. Our results suggest that the water rights priority has a profound impact on agricultural outcomes, indicating strong institutional effects and weak influence of market-based approaches. Farmers respond to both long-term and seasonal water supply change and variation, and they respond to seasonal water supply forecasts in varied ways depending on their water rights portfolios, thus signalling a disproportionate distribution of potential impacts of water supply change.

Water supply and water allocation strategy in the arid US West: evidence from the Eastern Snake River Plain Aquifer

“…We present the details of the model setups, derivations and modeling constraints discussions in the Appendix. For the discussion covering land scarcity case in which land is insufficient compared to total available water, see Xu et al (2014b).…”

Upstream with a shovel or downstream with a water right? Irrigation in a changing climate

“…That said, in a snowmelt driven system, being too far upstream is hypothetically possible. If diverting from a tributary rather than a mainstem, fewer streams aggregate and therefore reduce the reliability of flow (Xu et al, 2014b). And if catchment sizes are smaller, less water is available (USDA, 2012).…”

“…There are instances in Colorado where upstream users have senior rights but are not able to divert water because it simply is not there (denoted as a "futile call"). Therefore, the hydrograph of the stream from which water is diverted (USDA, 2012; Xu et al, 2014b), the number of irrigators diverting water upstream of a given user (Janssen et al, 2011;Lam, 1998), and available storage technology (Cody et al, 2015;Cox & Ross, 2011;Smith, 2016) combine to influence physical water availability and therefore the relative role of water rights.…”

“…PA therefore poses real limits to use (Torpey-Saboe, et al, 2015). Recent studies have found that PA is influential today and is expected to be influential under climate change on the Snake River in Idaho (Xu et al, 2014a;Xu et al, 2014b). Ongoing activity in Colorado's Water Courts implies that adherence to these water rights is expected by irrigators and consequences follow from a lack of implementation and violations of the law.…”

“…The consistently positive significant influence of increasing water right priority rank almost certainly because water rights are monitored and enforced between irrigators themselves and by the state (Castex, et al, 2015;Goldstein & Hudak;Hurlbert & Mussetta, 2016;Torpey-Saboe, et al, 2015). Contemporary literature in Western US suggests water rights matter (Xu et al, 2014a;Xu et al, 2014b). Some of the literature on water in the Western United States has been skeptical of the real world application and influence of PA due to various higher level policies (Benson, 1998;Benson 2012;Tarlock, 2000;Tarlock, 2001).…”