Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Table 3 <br />ACREAGE IRRIGATED UNDER VARIOUS CONDITIONS OF IRRIGATION EFFICIENCY <br />Colorado River Indian Reservation <br /> <br />~ <br />~ <br />~ <br />("v <br /> <br />Condition <br /> <br />1974 <br /> <br />Reduce operational waste to <br />7 percent <br /> <br />Reduce operational waste to 7 <br />percent and line canals <br /> <br />N <br />... <br /> <br />Reduce operational waste to <br />7 percent, and increase onfarm <br />efficiency to 71 percent <br /> <br />Reduce operational waste to 7 <br />percent, line canals, and <br />improve onfarm efficiency to <br />71% <br /> <br />Onfarm <br />Effi ci ency 1/ <br />(Percent) - <br /> <br />Farm <br />Del ivery <br />(AF/AC) <br /> <br />7.16 <br /> <br />System <br />Efficiency <br />(Percent) <br /> <br />Di vers i on <br />Per Acre <br />(AF/AC) <br /> <br />9.58 <br /> <br />Colorado <br />River <br />Diversion <br /> <br />Acres <br />Irrigated <br /> <br />65,655 <br /> <br />70,620 <br /> <br />78,720 <br /> <br />89,140 <br /> <br />99,375 <br /> <br />1/ <br />2/ <br /> <br />56.1 <br /> <br />56.1 <br /> <br />7.16 <br /> <br />72.5 <br /> <br />648,766 <br /> <br />8ased on a weighted average consumptive use of 4.02 acre-feet per acre. <br />Supreme Court allowance for Reservation in Arizona, minus allowance for municipal and industrial use, <br />minus 20,000 acre-foot cushion against over diversion. (662,402-2,402-20,000 = 640,000) <br /> <br />56.1 <br /> <br />7.16 <br /> <br />71 <br /> <br />5.67 <br /> <br />71 <br /> <br />5.67 <br /> <br />79 <br /> <br />9.06 <br /> <br />640,000 1:./ <br /> <br />88 <br /> <br />8.13 <br /> <br />640,000 <br /> <br />79 <br /> <br />7.18 <br /> <br />640,000 <br /> <br />88 <br /> <br />6.44 <br /> <br />640,000 <br />