My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP11581
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
11000-11999
>
WSP11581
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:18:05 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 5:03:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8407.500
Description
Platte River Basin - River Basin General Publications - Missouri River
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
9/1/1986
Author
USDA
Title
Missouri River Tributaries - Colorado Cooperative River Basin Study - Potential for Irrigation System Improvements
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.
/
125
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 />SUMMARY <br /> <br /> <br />G'" ,- '\ <br />(t, . ''ll <br />'U J. .,__U-. <br /> <br />The Colorado Water Conservation Board, acting for the State of Colorado, <br />requested 'the Department of Agriculture to conduct a cooperative river basin study <br />of the Missouri River Tributaries within Colorado. This included the North and <br />South Platte River Basins along with the Republican River Basin. It was agreed <br />that the objective of this cooperative study would be to address the water <br />resource problems found in individual irrigation systems and to develop <br />alternatives that will improve their productivity, water use efficiency and water <br />management. A sample of representative irrigation systems was used in the study. <br /> <br />Twenty-three systems were selected for detailed study. In each of these <br />systems, the canal company and other local officials were interviewed. A list of <br />problems was developed. Alternatives were developed to address the problems <br />i dent ifi ed. <br /> <br />Monetary and non-monetary benefits used in comparing the feasibility of <br />alternatives for each system include the following: <br /> <br />1. Onfarm water conservation benefits. <br /> <br />a) reduce costs of production such as labor, water costs including <br />pumping, surface water and purchased water, and operation, <br />maintenance and replacement costs for onfarm ditch systems and <br />1 atera 1 s . <br />b) reduce water shortages which improve yields as well as conversion <br />to higher income crops. <br />c) reduce erosion and sediment costs. <br />d) reduce soil salinity and high water table damages. <br />e) reduce tailwater damages from weeds and pests. <br />f) improve irrigation systems through improved designs. <br /> <br />2. Off-farm water conservation benefits. <br /> <br />a) improve instream flow. <br />b) reduce operation, maintenance and replacement costs. <br />c) stabilize the agricultural economy of the area. <br /> <br />Table S-l summarizes the identified needs and feasible improvements. A <br />computer model was developed and used to analyze and compare alternatives for <br />each system studied. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.