Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- 19 - <br /> <br /> <br />" u" ; " 'J' " <br />U ..Cj,'.1 <br /> <br />Alternatives <br /> <br />Using the data from the worksheets for these canal systems,alternative <br />plans were developed for each system. The alternati.ve plans for canals and <br />onfarm improvements were composed of various combinations and amounts of the <br />following elements: canal lining, canal pipelines, diversion structures, <br />water-contpol structures, reservoir modifications, onfarm ditch linings, on farm <br />pipelines, land leveling, changes in irrigation methods and irrigation water <br />management. Pl ans rangi ng from primarily management only to total needed <br />structural and management treatment, were considered. Each alternative plan <br />was evaluated to determine its impacts on water supplies - both surface and <br />ground-water quality, change in land use or cropping patterns and yields, <br />change in production costs, and change in operation, maintenance and <br />replacement costs. The computer program, Irrigation Project Evaluation System <br />(IPES), was developed to evaluate and compare the economic effect of each <br />alternative with their yearly benefits. (See Appendix I for an example) <br /> <br />The alternatives for possible consideration on each system are listed as <br />follows: <br /> <br />FWOP - Future without project. <br /> <br />FWOP #2 - Future without project with limited changes in cropping patterns <br />allowed - no more than a 40 percent reduction and/or 10 percent increase <br />in acres of any crop. <br /> <br />Alternative #1 - Irrigation Water Management <br /> <br />Alternative #2 - "Canal Company Alternative" - Irrigation Water <br />Management along with structural measures to meet onfarm needs, and <br />measures to satisfy canal company stated needs in conveyance system. <br /> <br />Alternative #2M - Same as alternative #2 except the conveyance system <br />11n1ng lengths were modified to match the high seepage portions of the <br />canal. <br /> <br />Alternative #3 - Off-farm (canal) conveyance system structural needs. <br />(Irrigat10n Water Management not included) <br /> <br />Alternative #4 - Onfarm structural needs. (Irrigation Water Management <br />not 1ncluded) <br /> <br />Table D displays the most economically feasible alternative found in each of <br />the 23 systems studied. <br />