Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />4. Results: <br /> <br />It is too early to assign specifically an amount or value to the water <br />salvaged. Before completion of either branch of the drain and before <br />the atart of irrigation the drain was conveying 9.2 c.f.s., which <br />certainly was made up in large part from bank storage. Since completion <br />of the drain and start of the irrigation season, measurements have <br />increased to in excess of )3 c.f.s. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />At this time no stub laterals have been constructedl however, much <br />interest is indicsted by land owners in the area. Soil Conservation <br />Service personnel indicate that the Norton Drain reasonably should be <br />expected to drain a large part of the area which it can serve. This <br />would assure a substantial increase in both salvaged water and restoration <br />of presently water logged land to cultivation. As these have been the <br />ultimate goals it appears the project can be termsd a success in this <br />respect. Inquiries have been recaived by the Directors concerning the <br />extension of the West Branch. If this work is done an additional area <br />will be benefited and an additional source of water tapped. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />It appears that the original estimate of the amount of water to be <br />salvaged was conservative; however, it will take some time to determine <br />the overall benefits. The State is now installing a gaging 8tation <br />furnished by the District and will keep a record of the quantity of <br />water conveyed in the drain. A180, the State has agreed to take periodic <br />water quality samples. After one year of such measurements and a study <br />of the water quality, a better basis will be obtained on which to relate <br />future projects in the same category. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />5. Observations and Recommendations <br /> <br />While the Norton Project has attained the objectivea for which it was <br />planned it is apparent that better planning and design could eliminate <br />some of the problems that developed during and after construction. To <br />make a record of the problems that could have been svoided with better <br />design and witb added experience, the deficiencies and suggested <br />corrections are given below to aid in future projects. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />1. Unstable soil conditions and inadequate compaction has caused some <br />of the water crossing pipes to wash out. This situation was an <br />aggravation and would have been a more ssrious maintenance problem <br />if the contractor had not done much of the repair work at his own <br />expense. The situation could have been largely avoided if the water <br />crossing pipes were smooth wall for rigidity through the concrete <br />supports with corrugated metal pipe extensions at least 15 feet <br />into the banks. In addition, larger anti seepage collars with large <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />0565 <br /> <br />I <br />