My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HoleInTheRiverHistoryOfGroundwater
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
HoleInTheRiverHistoryOfGroundwater
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:17:39 PM
Creation date
10/8/2007 9:36:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8420.500
Description
South Platte River Basin Task Force
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Date
7/12/2007
Author
Nicolai A. Kryloff
Title
Hole In the River Draft Report Submitted to SPTF
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.
/
51
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
But pump irrigation did not come without problems. In addition to depleting <br />groundwater supplies, wells captured seepage water that was moving toward irrigation <br />canals and the South Platte. Some farmers obj ected that surface-water rights were being <br />interfered with. Code concl uded that because gr oundwater moved so slowly (perhaps <br />three miles a year, he calculated, depending on local conditions), pumpi ng had not greatly <br />38 <br />impacted surface flows. Nevertheless, J.M. Dille of the Northern Colorado Water <br />Conservancy District noted in 1942 that “complaints have been loud” among surface- <br />water irrigators. Strangely, however, no litiga tion had materialized. “Many irrigation men <br />are on both horns of the dilemma,” he explaine d to a Denver audience – in other words, <br />39 <br />many surface-water irrigators in the valley had wells of their own. In fact, Code <br />calculated in 1943 that fully 82 percent of existing wells were operated in conjunction <br />with surface rights. Despite an acknowledged correlation between the South Platte and its <br />underground water, the overlapping use of these two sources dampened litigation among <br />farmers. <br />As drought subsided by the 1940s, severa l developments sustained and even <br />increased groundwater use. With the onset of World War II, farmers ramped up crop <br />production to supply the American war effort . Along the South Platte , an agricultural <br />planning committee in 1944 empha sized the necessity of hi gh yields, recommending that <br />40 <br />irrigation pumps be run on a 24-hour ba sis “for economical use of water.” After the <br />war, well-drilling continued as a form of dr ought insurance – if the rains again vanished, <br />41 <br />farmers wanted to be prepared. Additionally, groundwater irrigation offered at least two <br />38 <br /> W.E. Code, “Does Irrigation Pumping Affect Stream Flow?” Western Farm Life, 1 June 1938. <br />39 <br /> J.M. Dille, “Irrigation Problems in Northern Colorado,” October 1942. Box 27, DEC. <br />40 <br /> “Good Farming Practices in Morgan County,” 1944. Box 73, EXT. <br />41 <br /> W.E. Code “Pumping for Irrigation,” The Western Farm Life 49, no. 2 (1947). <br />16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.