Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I' <br />I <br /> <br />Soil cation exchange capacity <br /> <br />- Precipitation <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />- SV:!D''.:'Ir;::::: ~on <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />- Municipal and industrial flow and quality <br /> <br />- Crop and phreatophyte conslLllptive use <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Salt and water budgets were constructed, the results of wnich are compared <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />with historical data in Tables II-I and II-2. Figure 11-1 shows the general <br /> <br />flow patterns for the salt budget in the San Rafael River Basin. <br /> <br />From the verification activities it was concluded that during the study period <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />(May 1982-March 1983) indeed the largest contribution of salt comes from the <br /> <br />irrigated sector (54 percent in the Price River Basin and 58 percent in the <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />San Ra fael River Basin). <br /> <br />Of this amount, 88 percent was attributable to the <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />ground water system. <br /> <br />Since contl:ibutions from the natural ground water <br /> <br />systems were found to be negligible, most of the ground water salinity can be <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />attributed to irrigation practices. <br /> <br />The mechanisms of irrigation deep per- <br /> <br />colation and canal seepage were found to be the major contributors. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />In summary, it was found that any alternative which will prevent water from <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />entering the ground water system "ill reduce salt load ing to the Colorado <br /> <br />River. On a basin-wide average for each acre- foot of water that can be pre- <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />vented from entering the ground water in the agricultural area, 2.4 tons of <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />salt per year will be prevented from entering the Colorado River. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />~ '. ~ r ~ .-~ <br />'1..1 ,} i.. V;"; v <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />II-2 <br /> <br />I <br />