<br />~f;umla farrners
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />N
<br />o
<br />00
<br /><..0
<br />
<br />ODDnse U $S.
<br />It 1
<br />.
<br />
<br />l'iuter prOject
<br />
<br />By G1t.,\NT SMITH
<br />
<br />Yti\L\ Farmers in this area
<br />ch<l!'ged Saturcl8Y tiwt they could be
<br />pnt out of business by federal plans to~.
<br />impl'ove the q\l~lity of Colorado River:'
<br />\'.'(1 tel' going across the border into
<br />i\le:dco.
<br />Criticism was aimed at U.S. Bureau
<br />of H~clal11alion plans to install a sys..
<br />t.em of pumps along the border and to
<br />tal,c out of production about 10,000,1
<br />aeres of farmland in the '~f)ilton~ I
<br />illohawl; Irrigation District. ,j; .'
<br />The c'ommcnts came in a bureau I
<br />hC<lring Saturday on an evironmental i
<br />impact statement coverl.'1g 'project~ :in I
<br />the YUl1.1a area for reducmg saluuty !
<br />levcI~ in the Colorado River. . \
<br />Under an Augllst 30, 1973, agreement I
<br />with the !vlcxican government, the U.S.
<br />promised to keep the, quality of r,j~er
<br />waiN' going into MexIco at a specIfied
<br />level.
<br />On June 24, Congress approved a
<br />series of projects along the river .to
<br />meet the agre{~ment requirernents,
<br />In the Yuma area, the bureau has. I
<br />proposed a desalting plant. the pump-' I
<br />ing pl'oj~ct, the lining of the Coachella \
<br />Canal in California and several other
<br />related projects. '\
<br />Only William Dubois of the California
<br />Farm Bureau commented on the desalt~ j
<br />ing plant. .
<br />Dl!ba.i~ pointed out that several elee..... I
<br />trical gl'nerattng plants are being plan~ "
<br />ned along the Colorado River and that
<br />each ivill use river water for coolmg,
<br />thns increasing the salinity of the I
<br />water.
<br />'Pile desalting plant is being built to
<br />frent only the ivater coming from the.
<br />Well ton-Mohawk district, he observed"
<br />rnd it \l'iiI requ;"e a great deal of;
<br />eledricil,y from the generating plants:.
<br />upstream.
<br />lie suggested building the gen7rating,
<br />plants ill the Yuma area and l~SlIlg ~hc'
<br />Weilton.;Vlohawk water for cooling. 'Ihe
<br />rrovermncnt would probably s a v e
<br />~-;lOn('y, he said, and the river water
<br />Cillulity would b~ preserved,
<br />
<br />- -~, >-',~ --
<br />
<br />Continued from Page A-I
<br />
<br />The rest of the hearing cell- .
<br />ten:'d On the pumping project
<br />and the decrease in acreage.
<br />
<br />E. A, Lundberg, regional di.
<br />rector of the Bureau of RecJa- .
<br />malion, admitted that studies'
<br />had conduded the pumping
<br />would lower the water table
<br />30 feet in the San Luis area
<br />and t.hat the bureau was con~
<br />cerned about what effects this.
<br />might have,
<br />
<br />Further, he noted, about 60
<br />miles of agricultural drains
<br />in Yuma Valley would be
<br />rendered inoperative. and
<br />most of tbe wUdlife habitat
<br />along the river would 'be'
<br />dried ouL
<br />
<br />However, the. pumping'
<br />project was described by the '
<br />Bureau as a protective -effort
<br />because a - similar system of
<br />pumps are already' in opera-
<br />tion on the Mexican side of
<br />the bohleI'. If the U,S. does-
<br />n't pwnp the water out of :
<br />Ihe ground, it will go 10.
<br />Mexico the bureau contends"
<br />
<br />,Up to 160,000 acre - feet of
<br />water a year will be pump-
<br />ed, and 125,000 acre - feet .
<br />will then go across the bot-
<br />der, according to -current:
<br />plans.
<br />
<br />Thr r.::duction In acreage;
<br />was ~roposed to reduce the
<br />amount of drainage from the
<br />district and help improve the
<br />quality of the water.
<br />
<br />Andrew Bettwy, Arizona
<br />land commissioner, joined
<br />the farmers in protesting. Up
<br />to 50.000 acres of land in the
<br />otate trust could be destroy,
<br />ed, Bettwy said, and the
<br />trust could lose about $60
<br />million at current prices,
<br />'jYou are going to take I
<br />watet' out from underneath :
<br />this land and revert it back !
<br />to desert," complained EIIl- '
<br />olt Waits, a director of the:
<br />Yuma Ivlesa Irrigation Dis.
<br />trict. "It will be wOrth Both.
<br />ing. It is a gross injustice to
<br />the people of Yuma County."
<br />Others said farmers in the:
<br />,Jrea had worked for years i
<br />to make the land productive, 'j
<br />and now all tbat work could II
<br />be ruined.
<br />Wade Peterson, a Wemon I
<br />farmer, said he had spent 1
<br />most of his adult life trying I
<br />to put land into production I
<br />and nOw he had 80 acres
<br />that were tagged to be taken
<br />Qut-of production.
<br />
<br />"]t just doesn't make
<br />sense,,'.' he, sa~tl. .
<br />
<br />-,-~ ;" -.
<br />
<br />,
<br />
<br />
<br />~
<br />\
<br />
<br />
<br />'--"".'"
<br />
|