Laserfiche WebLink
The overall feasibility of integrating recharge into existing water operations will depend on <br />physical, economic, and political factors. No single approach may be adequate to address <br />all possible conditions and recharge opportunities. All recharge technologies have certain <br />barriers, risks, and limitations, and a comprehensive program may integrate more than one <br />approach to address different conditions. Consequently, it is worthwhile to examine the <br />possible advantages and disadvantages of alternative mechanisms in developing effective <br />programs and appropriate policies for groundwater recharge. <br />Program Development Alternatives <br />Groundwater recharge could be promulgated through a number of mechanisms depending <br />on the purpose and scope of recharge applications. Table ES2 summarizes a range of <br />alternatives for future program development and briefly describes possible advantages and <br />disadvantages. This discussion only illustrates some of the apparent opportunities and <br />implications for consideration in future groundwater recharge efforts. Actual program <br />development would depend on political and economic support. More detailed discussion <br />of these issues is provided in the Summary of Findings in this program summary report. <br />Table ES2. Alternatives Program Mechanisms <br />Mechanism - Purpose <br />Advantages / Disadvantages <br />No Action - Continue current policy <br />No immediate cost. Recharge is applied on inconsistent basis, and groundwater <br />and activities <br />depletion continues with national social and economic implications. <br />Policy Initiative - Promote groundwater <br />Promotes consistency and could be expanded to coordinate with States or local <br />recharge without physical action <br />organizations to coordinate legal institutions and provide guidelines for recharge <br />applications. Does not directly support in any active recharge efforts. <br />Cooperative Assistance - Provide <br />Could help to promote recharge through information transfer and assistance in <br />technical assistance and coordination <br />planning efforts. Lower cost with minimal participation. Only benefits those <br />already interested. Partial support in implementing recharge. <br />Similar Cost -Share Program - Directly <br />Can be effective to implement recharge on local or regional basis depending on <br />assist in individual recharge projects <br />the program formulation. Allows some repayment of costs but may not be <br />equitable between water users. Another partial support mechanism. . <br />Specific Recharge Initiative - Specific <br />May be the only feasible mechanism to undertake recharge of depleted regional <br />program funding for conjunctive use or <br />aquifers. Requires significant long term -term planning and multijurisdictional <br />regional aquifer recharge <br />coordination. Benefits and costs would depend on specific scope. <br />Watershed Planning - Comprehensive <br />Could address larger issues and account for inherent constraints and projected <br />plans to integrate water management <br />future use trends. May need to be combined with other incentives or other <br />needs and constraints I <br />direct approaches to achieve specific recharge objectives. <br />The three current agricultural recharge priorities described previously are consistent with <br />existing Reclamation programs. This does not necessarily mean that the recharge facilities <br />should be physically integrated with Reclamation operations. Alternative approaches to <br />integrate recharge into water operations are possible using existing mechanisms and <br />objectives defined at the program level. Agricultural productivity is a widely recognized <br />national interest, and Reclamation capabilities and operations are logistically aligned with <br />irrigated agriculture in the Western United States. <br />Executive Summary Ell <br />