My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP08768
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
WSP08768
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:49:35 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:15:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8273.500
Description
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control - Federal Agency Reports - EPA
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
7/1/1978
Title
Implementation of Agricultural Salinity Control Technology in Grand Valley
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
211
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br />W non automated systems, but offer a larger potential for <br />C) reducing on-farm salinity contributions due to increased <br />~ irrigation efficiencies. Sprinkler and trickle irri- <br />W gation systems are not competitive with head ditch <br />linings whereas automated head ditches can compete and <br />can increase the cost-effectiveness of head ditch <br />linings. Sprinkler and trickle irrigation systems <br />become feasible near the $150/metric ton value. <br /> <br />:,t <br /> <br />5) Irrigation scheduling by itself is not a significant <br />salinity control alternative, but should be part of any <br />strategy for improved water management in order to <br />maximize the effectiveness of physical improvements. <br /> <br />6) Canal linings reduce salt loading at unit costs <br />ranging from $190 to $700 per metric ton of salt <br />removed. <br /> <br />7) Desalting in conj,unction with pump drainage can be <br />expected to become feasible to reduce salt 10ading at <br />approximately $320 per metric ton. <br /> <br />8) Field relief drainage is infeasible at any cited down- <br />stream detriment figure. <br /> <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />9) Cost-sharing programs are highly effective in attracting <br />irrigators to participate in programs for improving the <br />lateral and on-farm components of the irrigation system, <br />provided adequate technical assistance is provided. <br /> <br />10) Allowing individual irrigators to use their labor to <br />meet all or part of their matching requirements cer- <br />tainly contributed to the ease of accomplishing the <br />goals of this project. <br /> <br />11) In Grand Valley, the jurisdiction of the irrigation <br />companies does not include the laterals in most cases, <br />so there are no formal arrangements for managing the <br />irrigation water supply and settling disputes among <br />water users. <br /> <br />, "' <br /> <br />~_ ~ ~;.'L._ "" ,c"-,, <br /> <br /> <br />l2) The informal organizational arrangements used for the <br />lateral improvement program, although satisfactory on <br />most of the laterals, resulted in numerous problems on <br />a few laterals as far as collecting required matching <br />funds for the project, as well as some difficulties in <br />implementing improved irrigation practices. <br /> <br />13) Individual on-farm improvements should be the result of <br />individual negotiations between the irrigator and tech- <br />nical assistance personnel. <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br />;;.;. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.