My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01268
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01268
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:30:12 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:18:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8054.100
Description
Water Salvage - Water Salvage Study - HB 91-1154
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
12/6/1990
Author
Natural Resources La
Title
Background Documents and Information 1991 - Report on Irrigation Water Supply Organizations
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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 />001007 <br /> <br />The sources of agriculturally caused pollution are directly related to (I) the amount of <br /> <br /> <br />water applied; and (2) the specific lype$ of irrigation practices employed, such as pesticide <br /> <br />application, Districts could develop the ability to work. with both of these aspects of pollution <br /> <br /> <br />sources. The first order of business is to facilitate the irrigation districts' acceptance of the idea <br /> <br /> <br />that they need to be a part of any water quality solution. <br /> <br />One way to start this acceptance process is through legislative expansion of the power <br /> <br />and authority delegated to districts, But merely giving them the power to address pollution <br /> <br />control is unlikely to result in districts voluntarily taking on this new responsibility, even if their <br /> <br /> <br />own water supply is polluted, In addition, there needs to be either governmental incentives <br /> <br />provided or requirements imposed, <br /> <br />The success of any of these approaches may depend on what tyPe of irrigation district is <br /> <br />involved. It is therefore important to keep in mind the differences between (1) large corporate <br /> <br />districts; (2) large eXurban districts; (3) BOR districts; (4) districts involved with Indian water <br /> <br /> <br />rights; and (5) traditional or actual irrigation districts. Despite the expected differences, all of <br /> <br /> <br />these types of districts are considered public entities although they operate solely for the benefit <br /> <br />of their members. <br /> <br />Perhaps in the context of pollution control, districts should be treated the same as <br /> <br /> <br />private corporations or private entities and should be responsible for the pollution that enters <br /> <br />the water through canals and ditcheS within their boUndaries. Part of the reason for excluding <br /> <br />irrigation from the Clean Water Act was because the return flows were considered diffuse. But <br /> <br />29 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.