Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />The Soil Conservation Service evaluated three alternative plans: <br /> <br />1. Future conditions without project <br /> <br />2. Improved water management with minimwn works of improvement <br /> <br />3. National Economic Development Plan (NED) <br /> <br />Tole I.~LD clan was selected as the Soil Conser-vation Service Rec01t1mended Plan <br /> <br />and the farmer selected plan. Al though local interests have expressed their <br /> <br />preference for this plan the cost sharing requirements presents obstacles for <br /> <br />many farmers to implement these improvements. <br /> <br />Comb ined Plan <br /> <br />In order to alleviate the cost to the local farmers the SCS and Reclamation <br /> <br />have explored the possibility of building a pressurized sprinkler irrigation <br /> <br />system. Under this plan Reclamation would build the main distribution system <br /> <br />and the SCS would be responsible for the on-farm sprinkler systems. <br /> <br />The incremental cost associated with developing the plan is presented in <br /> <br />Table 1. <br /> <br />If the combined plan were to be buil t. this would preclude the construction of <br /> <br />any independent plans by SCS and Reclamation. <br /> <br />Under Reclamation's plan of winter watering, stock ponds would be lined and <br /> <br />enlarged to eliminate the need for running water through canals during the <br /> <br />winter months. Under the comb ined pI an. wate r for I ivestock would be del i- <br /> <br />vered through the main distribution system to stock watering troughs. <br /> <br />ODCC4B <br /> <br />III <br />