(Continued from page 20)

proposals from Western lawmakers.
• The measures seek to change laws that block or restrict hydropower projects on systems built by the government after 1939, as part of efforts to help people hard-hit by drought at the time of the Dust Bowl. They would promote projects of five megawatts or less that could generate money and work for irrigation districts.
• As costs mount to repair aging water supply networks and make them more efficient in the face of recurring drought, irrigation district managers said the electricity from small hydropower projects could be sold to provide money to help cover their expenses.
• "We have the ability for more power generation but are being held back," said Gary Mancos, superintendent for the Mancos Water Conservancy District in southwestern Colorado.
• A hydropower bill from Colorado Republican Rep. Scott Tipton, which would cover 373 Bureau of Reclamation canals and water conduits, passed the House last month with broad support from both parties. A similar measure from Wyoming Republican Sen. John Barrasso has cleared the committee level in the Senate and is awaiting a floor vote.
• Another House bill, from Republican Rep. Steve Daines of Montana, targets a dozen waterways not fully covered by the other measures. It had an initial hearing last week and could come up for a committee-level vote over the summer.
• Daines' bill includes water supply projects in Montana, Utah, Idaho, South Dakota, Colorado, Nebraska and Texas.
• The first-term Republican said allowing hydropower development on those irrigation systems would help promote a renewable energy resource at no cost to taxpayers, while giving a boost to irrigation districts that are vital for producing crops as varied as sugar beets, corn, malted barley and alfalfa.
• "Besides water, our rancher and farmers in Montana need power. These same irrigation projects have the potential to power homes and businesses," Daines said. "The federal government stands in the way, as current law prohibits non-federal developers from taking full advantage" of hydropower from irrigation systems.
• Bruce Farling with Montana Trout Unlimited said he's reviewed the proposals and did not have any immediate concerns that they could hurt fisheries. For projects limited solely to irrigation systems, "fish shouldn't be there in the first place," he said.
• But he added that future hydropower initiatives would have to be looked at individually to make sure there were no problems like the possibility of fish getting trapped in a canal.
• The measures before Congress also have received qualified support from the

(Continued on page 22)