My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AgWaterConservationPaper
CWCB
>
Publications
>
DayForward
>
AgWaterConservationPaper
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2009 11:47:08 AM
Creation date
2/17/2008 2:14:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Publications
Year
2008
Title
Meeting Colorado's Future Water Supply Needs: Opportunities and Challenges Associated with Potential Agricultural Water Conservation Measures - Draft Report
Author
Colorado Agricultural Water Alliance
Description
Meeting Colorado's Future Water Supply Needs: Opportunities and Challenges Associated with Potential Agricultural Water Conservation Measures - Draft Report
Publications - Doc Type
Other
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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
Section 6 <br />Site-Specific Opportunities and <br />Limitations <br />The opportunities and linutations for agricultural water conservation nleasures vary <br />significantly from basin to basin. In order to calculate volumes and locations of <br />potentially available water, a basul specific ailalysis will be necessary, a task that is <br />beyond the scope of this paper. A few exanlples of the l~asin specific limitations and <br />potential opportunities are noted l~elow. More detailed infornlation on interstate <br />conlpact requirenlents can be found uz Sectiarl4 of the SWSI report. <br />South Platte <br />^ In fl1e South Platte, the conlpact with Nebraska only requires the delivery of water <br />to one ditch in Nebraska under certain conditions during the irrigation season. <br />There are no requirenlents for delivery durulg the non-irrigation season. <br />^ The Three States Agreenlent between Colorado, Nebraska, and Wyoming and the <br />Department of Interior has certain periodic flow targets and requirements <br />regarduzg future depletions. <br />^ The conversion to center pivot sprulklers in Water Districts 1, 2, 3, and 64 nlay <br />result u1 a reduction of return flows and inlpacts on alluvial groundwater, which <br />historically were supplied from flood irrigation. <br />^ There is a potential for water conservation nleasures in Water District 64, especially <br />dowilstreanl ilear the state line if these were inlplenleilted in a way fllat would not <br />impact any Colorado water rights or endangered species flows. <br />Arkansas <br />^ The Arkansas River Compact requires the nlaintenance of historical streamflow <br />conditions as of fl1e date of the conlpact. <br />^ The Colorado State Enguleer has taken tlle position that agricultural efficiency <br />inlprovenlents uz the Arkansas nlay not result u1 any reduction of historical return <br />flows as contemplated u1 the Arkansas River Conlpact. <br />^ Existing irrigation practices have resulted in return flows that have raised the water <br />table resultuzg u1 non-beneficial CU (as evaporatioil fronl the soil surface) and <br />increasing the salinity of bot11 growld water and surface water. Any nleasures <br />addressing these concerns nlust be u1 conforinance with the Conlpact. <br />^ Irrigation of certain lands results in significant inlpacts to downstream water <br />quality fronl leaching of inetals and salulity. In addition tlle return flows from <br />irrigation of these lands inlpacts agricultural production on other lands diverting <br />downstreanl. <br />DRAFT 6-1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.