Laserfiche WebLink
<br />the Colorado River by reducing the deep percolation which causes highly saline return flows <br />in areas like the Grand Valley. The program is also active in the Uncompahgre Valley of <br />the Gunnison Basin, and the McElmo Creek area near Cortez, Colorado. <br /> <br />USBR salinity improvements are federally funded in recognition that the Mexican <br />delivery is a nationwide, rather than a basin specific, obligation and because of the vast land <br />holdings of the U.S. in the basin. A 25% repayment on USBR salinity project construction <br />costs is made to the federal treasury from the Lower Colorado and the Upper Colorado <br />River Ba~in Funds. Local project participants pay no share of USBR project costs. While <br />they ar . 'quired to sign contracts obligating themselves to maintain and operate the newly <br />improv systems, USBR fully reimburses participants for any additional maintenance <br />expens,s caused by those new systems. The SCS program requires both cost sharing by <br />individual project participants and repayment from the same Basin Funds used to repay the <br />USBR. Ultimately, the SCS on-farm measures are paid for in the following proportion: <br />30% by individual participants, 21% from the Basin Funds, and 49% by the U.S. There is <br />no requirement tying participation in the USBR program with participation in the SCS <br />program. Therefore, a farmer could benefit from an improved ditch without committing to <br />expend any funds or making anyon-farm changes. <br /> <br />Construction of salinity control features in the Grand Valley has been underway since <br />1980 when a 6.8 mile segment of the Government Highline Canal near Mack, Colorado was <br />concrete lined as a demonstration project, Grand Valley Unit Stage I. Using salinity data <br />and design information gained in Stage I a comprehensive program to remove 139,500 tons <br />per year of salt from the Colorado River was proposed as Grand Valley Unit Stage II. <br />Portions of Stage II are currently being constructed, other portions are being designed, and <br />some have been deferred or eliminated as new cost estimates indicate they are no longer <br />cost effective. As currently configured Stage II will remove approximately 108,000 tons per <br />year of salt load from the Colorado River when fully implemented. As of early 1990 Stage <br />I had already reduced salt load by 21,900 tons per year and the completed portion of Stage <br />II reduced the load by another 26,000 tons per year. <br /> <br />Segments of the GVIC system involving approximately 217 miles of earthen laterals <br />to be replaced with gravity pressure pipe were induded in the Stage II plan. The improved <br />GVIC segments were estimated to reduce saline seepage return flows to the Colorado River <br />by 6,500 AF per year. This volume of seepage reduction was at the core of efforts to enact <br />HB 91-11 with several GVIC water users strenuously promoting their right to retain and <br />sell any 0,. this water not needed for diversion as "saved" water. As of July, 1991 this <br />seepage reduction will not occur, since GVIC shareholders voted not to participate in the <br />Salinity Program, and this particular increment of "saved water" will not materialize. <br /> <br />The federal Salinity Act creates no daimto any saved or salvaged water produced <br />through the program. The fate of this water, if any, is specifically left for allocation under <br />state law. The Salinity Control Act states that "in implementing the units ... the Secretary <br />shall comply with procedural and substantive state water laws," 43 USC Section 1592(b)( 4), <br /> <br />3 <br />