WSP08666

• File Number: 8221.112.I
• Description: Central Arizona Project
• State: AZ
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Date: 3/19/1982
• Title: Final Environmental Impact Statement: Water Allocations & Water Service Contracting - Central Arizona Project
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: EIS

~
c
IX>
e-.:

c..

2.

Municipal and Industrial Water Users

The municipal and industrial recommendations by DWR in 1980 for
allocations (and analyzed in Alternatives 2-5) included 80 entities. Based on
Secretary Watt's November 12, 1981 proposed allocation for Indian use, the DWR
revised its M&I recommendations, and these 1982 revisions are considered in the
Proposed Action (Alternative 6). These recommendations include 85 entities.

The Ari zona Groundwater Management Act (GMA) allows the
transfer of ground water supply of up to 3 acre-feet per acre per year from
agricultural use to municipal and industrial use. It is assumed that an entity
faced with a water shortage will purchase and retire farmland to gain
sufficient water to support the population.

The main effects of CAP allocations would be the timing and
extent of farmland retirement. Table 2 gives the cumulative effects in acres
for all the entities involved. As may be seen, the No Action alternative
retires significantly more farmland, nearly 7,000 acres as compared to just
over 4,300 acres for Kleppe, since the No Action places heavy emphasis on
agricultural water, which would force M&I entities to retire farmland for M&I
water. The other alternatives result in the retirement of about 2,000 acres of
farmland. Farmland retirement resulting from the Proposed Action is expected
to fall between that shown for Alternatives 3 and 4, based on projected'water
deliveries for Alternative 6. The difference between farmland retirement in
Alternatives 3 and 4 is minimal, less than 5 percent.

The difference among alternatives in urbanization of
agricultural land is minimal. The maximum difference among the six
a lternati Yes is 532 acres, or 1. 5 percent of the total number of acres to be
urbanized. The maximum difference among the alternatives in the urbanization
of desert land is 539 acres, or 0.3 percent of the total number of desert acres ;'
to be urbanized.

The majority of entities are not expected to receive any
significant adverse impacts as a result of short-term construction activities.
Where adverse impacts occur, they are likely to take the form of water used to
support construction activities (e.g. dust control) that might otherwise be
used for domestic consumption. For those entities proposing "wheel ing
agreements" to recei ve thei r recommended all ocati on through the use of
existing facilities, the facilities might be affected by some minor
construction on the canals while conveyance capacity is being upgraded.

In almost all cases, the long-term impacts to biological
resources are likely to add relatively low incremental effects to those of the
projected growth and development that will accompany baseline conditions.

{~tg~

14