My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP00913
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
WSP00913
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:28:27 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:01:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8272.600.60
Description
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program - Basin Member State Info - Utah
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
3/7/1975
Title
Colorado Regional Assessment Study - Phase One Report for the National Commission on Water Quality - Part 2 of 2 -- Chapter VI - end
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
288
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 />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~ <br />o <br />o <br />"'1 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Protection Agency. It is far from obvious, however, that a system of <br /> <br />rules and standards for maintaining water quality can be operated efficiently <br /> <br />in the special context of the salinity problem in the Colorado River Basin. <br /> <br />Given irrigation technology, crops and saline return flows are <br /> <br />produced jointly in almost fixed proportions. Because of the intricate <br /> <br />and diverse plant, soil, and water relationships in irrigation, differing <br /> <br />salinity levels in in-take waters, and variations in irrigation efficiency, <br /> <br />it is very difficult to assign return flows and quality changes to an individual <br /> <br />irrigator. It is difficult, therfore, to visualize how meaningful standards <br /> <br />relative to return flow could be applied to each irrigator. Perhaps they <br /> <br />could be to a given project or area. But rules would have to be invoked <br /> <br />that would limit irrigation to the least saline soils, or would require <br /> <br />a quality-improving irrigation technology, or a regulated seasonal use <br /> <br />to minimize negative concentrating effects or restrictions on the crops <br /> <br />that could be grown. Any of these actions would be costly to irrigators <br /> <br />and would reduce their management flexibility and would increase water <br /> <br />costs to the consumer. They would also require a strong monitoring <br /> <br />and enforcement agency. In terms of Figure VI-l, the MNB function <br /> <br />would be shifted downward and to the left. In theory, MNB might shift <br /> <br />far enought so that the private optimum would be at the social optimum <br /> <br />OA. Of course, many of the private net benefits would be destroyed <br />e <br /> <br />by employing such rules and the solution would be highly inequitable if the <br /> <br />upstream irrigators were required to bear the full cost of such rules. <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br />i <br />I <br />J <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.