My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7958
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7958
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:32 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 10:00:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7958
Author
Norman, R. E.
Title
Grand Valley Water Management Study
USFW Year
1994.
USFW - Doc Type
A Carrot Or A Hammer?, (with attachment-MOU Concerning Grand Valley Water Management Oppotunities).
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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 />One GVWUA request that the Salinity Control Program has been unable to <br />meet is lining the Middle Government Highline Canal. The managers of the <br />Salinity Control Program have decided to indefinitely defer lining this portion <br />of canal due to the unacceptable cost-benefits ratio. This will be the only <br />portion of the canal not lined downstream from Tunnel No. 3. The GVWUA <br />see this as a weak link and a detriment to their operation. It appears feasible <br />to cost share lining this portion of the canal between the endangered fish <br />program and the salinity program. This could be done by determining the <br />maximum amount the salinity program would be willing to pay for the im- <br />provements and then having the endangered fish program pay the balance. <br />It may be possible to justify these improvements because, from an operational <br />standpoint, these improvements would enhance the water management options <br />and would lead to more water savings. In addition, initial studies indicate that <br />the check structures would elevate the water surface in this portion of canal. <br />Due to the enlarged wetted perimeter associated with the increased elevation, <br />increased seepage is expected. Since the increased elevation would be wetting <br />upper portions of the canal which have never, or infrequently, been wetted, <br />the seepage rates are expected to be high. This increased seepage would be <br />detrimental to salinity control and would reduce management opportunities. <br />There is a quiet mutual lack of trust between the water user and environmental <br />communities. It is doubtful that the environmental community would tolerate, <br />much less encourage, using recovery program funds to improve irrigation <br />facilities on the hope that water would be saved. At the same time, until the <br />improvements are complete, actual savings would be hard to determine. <br />Actual savings would be partially dependent on the desire of the water users to <br />save. Given enough encouragement, water users may be willing to construct <br />on-farm irrigation improvements to further save water or even change cropping <br />patterns to those crops which consume less water. <br />The most evident system of encouragement is financial. With this in mind a <br />possible solution would be to pay the GVWUA on a per unit of volume saved. <br />To provide up front funding of the large canal improvements, it may be <br />possible to provide a low interest loan. Payments for water savings could then <br />be used to pay off the improvement loan. If more revenue is generated by <br />saved water payments than is needed to service the loan, the excess could be <br />used to accelerate loan payments, pay for on-farm improvements, pay for <br />additional system improvements, help pay for operation and maintenance cost <br />for the existing system, or help pay for additional operation and maintenance <br />payments associated with the salinity program facilities.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.