My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP10071
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
10001-10999
>
WSP10071
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:57:10 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:06:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8126.700
Description
Arkansas River Coordinating Committee - Committees - Subcommittees
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
1/14/1975
Author
Wright Water Enginee
Title
Phreatophytes and Water Salvage
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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 />7 <br /> <br />Flood ~Iain alteration would also be one of the consequences of <br /> <br />phreatophyte removal. Significant obstruction is presented to flood waters <br /> <br />by a thickly-grown area of phreatophytes, causing a slowing of the flood <br /> <br />flow. <br /> <br />There are many legal considerations involved in the various aspects <br /> <br />of phreatophyte control. Certainly the question of how the "additional water" <br /> <br />flowing in the stream is to be administered should receive attention. The <br /> <br />probable short term nature of the water salvaged by phreatophyte control <br /> <br />makes this a particularly important question. The determination of to whom <br /> <br />the benefit of increased stream flow shal I go has great significance in terms <br /> <br />of who should bear the cost of control, <br /> <br />The actions of concerned citizens <br /> <br />are I ikely to playa significant role because of the alterations to the <br /> <br />environment which are 1 ikely to be caused by any program of water salvage <br /> <br />by phreatophyte control. <br /> <br />5 UMMAR Y <br /> <br />I t should be apparent from the above cOlwnents that there are many facets <br /> <br />to the problem of phreatophyte control about which there is insufficient <br /> <br />information and inadequate impact studies. The envi ronmental effects of the <br /> <br />various methods of phreatophyte control merit ~xhaustive study before imple- <br /> <br />mentation of any measures, particularly since the environmental costs could <br /> <br />be qui te substant i a I. <br /> <br />Once this information becomes available, rational decisions can be made <br /> <br />concernin] the nature anJ extent of phreatophyte control. <br /> <br />Because of the reJional nature of the benefits and drawbacks of phreato- <br /> <br />phyte contml, ,t "ould seem that such a study shoulu be conducted on a <br /> <br />~tatewiJe basis. This ~s particularly a~lpropriate since the administration <br /> <br />of our water resources is currently :1undlc..J ~,l the stale level. Decision~ <br /> <br />'- ,-. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.