7187

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7187
• Author: Mustard, E. W. and C. D. Rector.
• Title: Wetlands, Irrigation and Salinity Control
• USFW Year: 1979.
• USFW - Doc Type: Lower Gunnison River Basin, Colorado.
• Copyright Material: YES

R76 y
\ ?Wlldlll• Neellal Value
Bsb
moron
wlaul. w.
16
Ila
10(
t
0
ee.e,a, ..,aa? iwaov.a?.al
WATER SOURCE
Figure 2.-Comparison of means for wildlife habitat value and
ILldlife use rating, by water source, from 30 intensively
studied wetlands, Lower Gunnison River Basin, Colorado, 1978
12t
SIC
IOI
91
B
o T
-+ 5
0
3 ,
0o
WNdIN. Naellol V.I..
30
Ts d wndnl. u..
zo
e
UZ a'
w?
4
0
s
to
WW
G
me,a.a, .m.?..,
Nsr,ow-Wend Ielnepen.d w/wa1,,
WETLAND CLASS
Figure 3.-Comparison of means for wildlife habitat
value and wildlife use rating, by wetland class,
from 30 intensively studied wetlands, Lower Gunnison
River Basin, Colorado, 1978
m^
a
`a
W
0
i
'o
nz
to
?r-Wlldlll. Naellol Voles
)a N,
?
to
00 s?_.. _..-oes

70
60 z
70
wumu. u+.
w
IT

IS

Minimize Impacts
Salinity control efforts could be
restricted to only those areas that contri-
bute the greatest salt loading. For
instance, for planning purposes SCS has
divided the basin into units or watersheds
and is determining the salt loading inputs
9
.or, from each. Preliminary data indicate that
one 7,322 ha area produces 43,200 t per year
or 18 percent of the total salt loading
attributed to irrigated agriculture in the
basin. Another opportunity to minimize
to impacts would be to implement salinity
control efforts only on the east side of the
Uncompahgre River which contributes the
majority of the total salt loading and has
fewer kilometers of canals, laterals and
irrigation ditches than the west side.
Wetlands on the east side of the river are
generally less valuable than those found on
the west.
Wetland losses could also be minimized
by designating those wetlands that are most
valuable, where disturbance should be a last
resort. These include wetlands adjacent to
the rivers and some found along the West and
Montrose-Delta canals on the west side of the
Uncompahgre River.
Replacement
to
Wetland losses should be replaced in the
vicinity, where possible. In salinity con-
trol efforts this may be impractical because
wet areas removed in the name of salinity
control may be replaced with nearby wetlands
that may have the same salt loading poten-
tial.
Some on-site habitat replacement is
possible, but not necessarily with wetlands.
However, many upland wildlife species freely
associate with wetlands so replacement of
some wetland habitat with upland habitat is
not as radical a departure as one might
think.
o?
3
0
a
RLe, Bolton, Eo+l w••,
LOCATION
Figure 4.--Comparison of means for wildlife habitat
value and wildlife uea-rating, by location, from 30
intensively studied wetlands, Lower Gunnison River
Basin, Colorado, 1978
Field border plantings could be made on
individual farms. Plant species that most
nearly replace those found in our wetlands
could be used. SCS irrigation specialists
indicate that about 25 percent of the water
put on a field with a furrow irrigation sys-
tem leaves the field as tailwater runoff.
This creates wet areas at the lower ends of
fields which adds to salt loading when these
tailwaters percolate into the ground water.
This percolation could be partially con-
trolled by planting phreatophytic plant
species which would remove excess water by
evapotranspiration. It is also a non-
315