My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01982
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD01982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:09:37 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:06:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
7/30/1976
Description
Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Resolution
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
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 />activities of eur state with the citizens of this state. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: The next item is the prepesed rese1ution ~hich is in <br />yeur folder. Do you have any comments on it? <br /> <br />MR.' SPARKS: Mr. Chairman, this is, directed to the preblem that the <br />gentleman from the Soil Censervation Service just spoke to us abeut. I <br />While we have autherizatien to cenduct certain projects which weuld <br />reduce the salinity return to. the Ce10rado River, the legislation <br />doesn't encompass the entire problem. Unless we can achieve greater on- <br />farm efficiency in irrigatien"there is no. way that we can really get at <br />the salinity problems. The Ce10rado River Basin Salinity Control Act <br />prevides that in that area, belew Imperial Dam at the lower end ef the <br />Colorado. River the Secretary can assist farmers in carrying out en-farm <br />imprevements, such as land leveling, sprinkler systems, drip systems, and <br />that type of thing. Financial assistance can be given by the United <br />States to farmers to. improve their operations and thus reduce the salinity <br />ret~rns. That's fine for that area below Imperial Dam, but most efthe <br />land irrigated in the Colorado. River Basin is abeve Imperial Dam. I <br />think that we sheu1d ask the Cengress to. amend that act to make the same <br />previsien applicable to the lands which are upstream. That's: what this <br />reso1utien is directed to. Its language may not be satisfactory, but in <br />any event Congress will work it ever if it's not correct. I think it's <br />necessary that we adept this reselution. It's directed primarily to. our <br />cengressienal delegatien. It asks them to. attempt to. amend the act to. <br />accomplish the required task. <br /> <br />MR,KROEGER: I'll move the adeptien of the reselutien. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Is there a secend? <br /> <br />MR. BENTON: I'll second it. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Very well. It's been meved and seconded. Is there any <br />discussion? Mr., Fetcher. <br /> <br />MR. FETCHER: Larry, the very fact that this kind of werk is being dene <br />in Grand Valley and, apparently, also. in the Gunnisen Valley, is that <br />because Congress has recognized that there is a preblem there? <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: The Grand Valley preject does net include on-farm improve- <br />ments. <br /> <br />MR. THORNTON: Mr. Chairman, may I attempt to answer that. What the act <br />says-- in the Mohawk area, there were funds made available for en-farm I <br />practices. The act says for the areas upstream of the Imperial Dam, the <br />conservation treatment needs will be carried eut under existing USDA <br />programs with no. funds put in the act fer carrying out these activities. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Any further discussien? <br /> <br />MR. MOSES: The gentleman is acquainted with it better than I. It was <br />put in the act erigina11y because it was an attempt to. make funds <br /> <br />-38- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.