| OCR Text |
Show indicate accuracy in at least the general magnitude of the coefficients. Perhaps a reasonable objective for future analyses would be not only the refinement of the state water coefficients, but also the development of regional water coefficients, recognizing, for example, the possibility of significant differences between the Uinta Basin and the Wasatch Front water intake per dollar of agricultural output. In order to develop the next two coefficients used in the study, two terms must be defined. First, household income includes not only wages and salaries, but proprietorship profits, dividends and transfer payments. Household income as a fraction of total dollar output for each of the 39 industrial sectors is given in Table 2 of [ 7]. Data on the number of employees ( including self employed and unpaid family workers) were supplied by the Utah State Employment Service. Our two additional basic coefficients, V2 ( intake in 1,000 gallons per employee) and V3 ( intake in 1,000 gallons per dollar of household income), are a function of the primary set, V^, and the employment and income data mentioned above. Any errors in the V]_ coefficients would, therefore, be reflected in both the V2 and V3 coefficients. Total water intake for the state of Utah estimated from the use of the water intake coefficients in this report is compared with the results of two other studies in order to test the reasonableness of our results. In the first study [ 11], total municipal and industrial water withdrawals for 1960 ( excluding agriculture) were given as 487,000 acre feet. On the basis of that study, we estimate withdrawals to be 530,000 acre feet for 1963. Compare this figure to the results of our present study. The total water intake for 63 |
