WSPC06215 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'-" 1 U. "-,. r: ,-..' LoG UJ 0oiorado River Basin <;;'~I~~ ~"5' \':, 'x\:,\ ~+-s '3 t \l \0. z. . Salinity Corllrol Foruin GOVERNms Fife Symington, AZ Pete Wilson. CA Roy Romer, CO Robert Miller, rw &uce Kino. NM Norman H oongerter. UT Mike Sullivan. WI fORUM MEMBERS Aflzono C. Laurence Unser .nold L Miller \....ollfornlO GerOld R Zimmerman Wolter G. Pettit Duone L Georgeson Colorado Do.Od W Robbins David W Walker J David Holm Nevada Jack l Stonehocker LeWIS H. Oodgloo Roland D. Westergard New MeXICO William J Miller Utah D. Lorry Anderson JayB.Pltkln Wyoming Gadon W Fassett William l. Garland Dan S. Budd EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Jack A Bornett . 106 West 5IXJ South, Suite 101 Bountiful. Utah 84010 (801) 292-4663 1992 COLORADO RIVER SALINITY ISSUES . Drought in the Colorado River Basin has accelerated the increase in the salinity concentrations of the Colorado River. This increase is as predicted, given the hydrology. Adverse hydrology increases the need for salinity control efforts. . Damages to U.S. water users at current salinity levels exceed $300 million annually, Those damages include agricultural damages to crops in the Palo Verde, Imperial and Coachella Valleys of California; and in the Central Arizona, Yuma, and Wellton-Mohawk areas of Arizona. Greater dollar damages are suffered by municipal and industrial users in locations like Phoenix, Tucson, Las Vegas, and the entire Los Angeles basin south through San Diego to the Mexican border. Additional damages are suffered by users in Mexico. . The Clean Water Act mandates that a program be implemented which will maintain the level of salt concentrations in three downstream measuring points below what has been termed the "numeric criteria." These three points are at locations where Las Vegas, Central Arizona, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, All-American Canal, and Yuma water users divert water from the river. . DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE: Agriculture's onfarm salinity control program is one of the most cost-effective opportunities to reduce salts in the Colorado River. This program, which requires less than 50 percent federal funds has been slowed by the lack of federal funding and has not kept pace with the efforts called for by the states and participating federal agencies and approved by EP A. The program which was scheduled to increase in funding level has been frozen at $14.8 million for the last three fiscal years. The Basin states believe that $18.5 million is needed this year. . MoaDa Valley Unit: The investigative effort for this Nevada project is nearly complete. Funds may be needed this fiscal year for advance planning. It is anticipated that construction funds will be needed in the next fiscal year. Without increased funding by the Congress, it may not be possible to proceed with the Moapa Valley Unit. . Lvman, Wvominl!: Farmers in the Lyman area of Wyoming (which includes a small portion of Utah) have expressed strong support and have requested that the opportunity for an onfarm program be investigated. A very preliminary analysis by the Department of Agriculture indicates that this area has promise. It appears unlikely that funds could be freed for this investigation unless the Department of Agriculture's funds are increased. . Price-San Rafael Rivers Unit: Investigation of this Utah effort has been completed, and intense discussions are being held with EPA concerning the environmental document. The Price-San Rafael Unit has great promise, salts can be removed in a very cost-effective way, yet serious consideration of implementing a program in the Price-San Rafael area cannot be given until additional funds are made available in the Department of Agriculture's budget. . Uinta Basin Unit: A request by residents in this area of Utah to expand the geographic area of this ongoing project has been given support by members of Congress, the Department of Agriculture, and the seven Basin states. A required environmental document has received critical review by EPA. The Basin states are most concerned about EPA's mandate that water quality standards be maintained while they raise, what the states believe are unreasonable, arguments about the preservation of man-induced wetlands.