Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />.-, <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~... <br />I-\. <br />~ <br />..... <br /> <br />SPECIAL STUDIES (continued) <br /> <br />With these models the implication for water resources projects is that <br />farm operation could be designed to use the least amount of water and <br />return the smallest amount of salt to the river while permitting the farmer <br />to obtain the greatest possible return from his farm. The salt load <br />reductions expected from irrigation scheduling and management could also be <br />verified on the Vernal Unit in the Uinta Basin. <br /> <br />2. Florida Project Area Study <br /> <br />Flow and quality data were collected a~ several points in the Florida <br />Project area beginning in 1958 before the project was constructed. A study <br />of these data for the period 1958-63 shows the effect of irrigation of <br />these lands on the quality of return flows leaving the area. <br /> <br />Results show that there has been a very small amount of pickup mea- <br />sured in the river downstream from the irrigated area. The concentration <br />of total dissolved solids in the inflowing water ranges from 0.14 to 0.17 <br />ton per acre-foot (103 to 125 mg/L). and that of the out flowing water <br />ranges from 0.17 to 0.30 ton per acre-foot (125 to 221 mg/L). About 13,720 <br />acreS (5550 ha) were irrigated at the time the measurements were made. <br /> <br />Other areas in the Colorado River Basin with similar <br />underlying aquifers would yield only minor amounts of salt. <br /> <br />type soils and <br /> <br />3. Grand Valley Area Agricultural Research Service <br /> <br />The Agricultural Research Service is doing a research study <br />Grand Valley with regard to irrigation efficiencies. This is <br />covered in Part VIII. <br /> <br />in the <br />further <br /> <br />4. Montezuma Valley <br /> <br />The Soil Conservation Service has conducted a study of on-farm im- <br />provements ~n ~he Montezuma Valley in Colorado. <br /> <br />5. Other Studies <br /> <br />Considerable variation in the effects of irrigation return flow on <br />water quality is to be expected. Differences arise due to the size of the <br />irrigated areas, the number of times the return flow is reused, properties <br />of the soils and drainage area, number of years land has been irrigated, <br />nature of aquiferst rainfall, dilution, temperature, irrigation methods, <br />storage reservoirs, vegetation, and type of return flow channels. <br /> <br />Consumptive use, ~eturn flow, salinity, and pollution studies are <br />continually being made by universities such as Utah State and Colorado <br />State and by Federal agencies in cooperation with State and local agen- <br />cies. Some of the study areas are purposely held small to achieve better <br />control, but they will be as representative as possible of existing proj- <br />ects. The results pertaining to the quantity of return flow wi 11 be very <br /> <br />104 <br />