Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br /> Theoreti cal <br /> farm de1ivery 11 <br /> (feet) <br />Area I 2.22 <br />Area II 1.87 <br />Area III 1.71 <br /> <br />11 based on average onfarm losses. <br /> <br />These quantities are based on a, 10-year average from 1969 to 1978. <br /> <br />When comparing the theoretical delivery to the actual farm delivery, <br />the lands irrigated in Area I appear to be experiencing shortages. <br />The shortage is most evi dent for the 1 ands i rri ga ted in the Frenchman <br />Valley and H&RW Irrigation Districts. Since 1974, these two irrigation <br />districts have received only half of the theoretical requirements. To <br />overcome these shortages, many of these farms are suppl ementing project <br />water with ground water. <br /> <br />The lands irrigated in Area II, with the exception of the Franklin <br />Pump and the Almena Canal, had a marginally adequate water supply. <br />Lands served within the Almena Irrigation District have not received a <br />full water supply since 1968. Ground water has been used conjunc- <br />tively with project water since that time. The other 1 ands in the <br />area have experienced shortages of approximately 5 inches accordi ng <br />to the theoreti cal wa ter supply. Because the theoreti cal requi re- <br />ments are determined for a large area and the lands served within <br />each individual irrigation district are only a small part of that <br />area, local conditions do vary. A 5-inch variation from the theo- <br />retical requirements is appro)(imately one irrigation appl ication and <br />is probably being made up by ground water. It should be noted that <br />the acres irrigated by the individual canals, with the exception of <br />Almena Canal, have increased in the acreages served over the years <br />(see table 48). As an exampl e, the acreage served by the Cambridge <br />Canal has increased from 13,500 in 1959 to 16,100 in 1978. Thi s is <br />an i nc rease of 15 percent. Increase sin i rri gated acreages without <br />a proportional increase in water supply reduces the availabil fty of <br />irrigation water in succeeding years and may cause the farmers to <br />i rri gate with 1 ess water. <br /> <br />The lands irrigated by the Superior Canal and the Courtland Canal <br />from the State line to Lovewell Reservoir show shortages of less than <br />one irrigation application when compared with the theoretical require- <br />ments. These lands have the most stable water supply in the basin. <br /> <br />The historica.l water suppl ies for the land in Areas II and III have <br />been adequate for the last 10 years. The water supply for the lands <br />irrigated in Area I has been margina1, and in recent years shortages <br />have been experienced. The water supply for the basin has been <br />decreasing in the 1ast 5 years and, if this trend continues, the <br /> <br />17 <br />