2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CHAPTER II STAGE ONE MONITORING • form a restricted outlet where ground water emerges to permit measure- ment of all water flow within a single monitoring point. The monitoring network included gauging stations at the hydrologic boundaries to measure water and salt entering and leaving the basin as well as stations within the basin to record water and salt in drains. Water and salt data were used in a boundary-defined water and salt budget that determines salt pickup from the watershed.l~ Also, a network of wells was developed throughout the watershed to measure water table depth and ground water chemistry. Monitoring data have shown that lining canals and placing laterals in pipe have reduced seepage in the Stage One area. The procedure for computing salinity reduction due to a decrease in seepage has been modi- fied since the selection of the recommended plan for Stage Two. Based on knowledge and information acquired during the monitoring program, the apportionment of ground water inflow and the associated salt loading has been modified. This modification primarily involved crediting more in- flow to the ground water system to cropland deep percolation and less to lateral and on-f arm distribution system seepage. Recent analyses using this procedure show canal lining to be slightly more effective and lat- eral lining to be less effective than previous estimates had shown. The revised hydrosalinity analysis considering the modified pro- cedure has shown a decrease in the estimated salt loading reduction of Stage One development from approximately 24,600 tons per year to about 19,900 tons annually and supports recommendations for initiating con- struction of Stage Two. Wildlife Monitoring Wildlife resources were monitored to determine the effect of Stage One on both wildlife habitat and populations and recreation associated with wildlife. Monitoring results supported recommendations for wildlife habitat compensation of Stage Two. Studies were initiated in 1981 under contract with the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW). Sample sites in Stage One and adjacent control areas were selected, and vegetation and wildlife resources were measured in both summer and winter seasons from 1981 to 1984. Annual reports (CDOW 1982, 1983, and 1984a) were prepared, as well as a final report (CDOW 1984b), where com- plete monitoring results are presented. Wildlife habitat types were mapped using aerial photographs. Popu- lation density and relative abundance of birds and mammals were monitored using several methods. Recreation involving use of wildlife resources 1/ Budgets are mass balance calculations of salt inflows and out- flows. 13