Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ALTERNATIVE PlANS <br /> <br />Study Methods and Assumptions <br /> <br />A sampling procedure was devised for planning farm irrigation systems on the <br />lands v.hich will be converted to irrigated cropland. The sample was based uJXln <br />the rumber of farm delivery JXlints or separate fields in the area. It was agreed <br />that a target of ccrnplete plans on 25 fields or systans would adEljuately <br />represent the project area. <br /> <br />A Dry Cropland Analysis, including net returns/acre, was mt inserted in the <br />report since the farmers have already or will be signing an agreement with the <br />Dolores Water Conservancy District to accept the water. <br /> <br />Resource Conservation plans were ccrnpleted for ten landowners. These plans <br />covered 27 separate fields or systems. They represent over 10 percent of the <br />project area. Alternative irrigation system designs were developed for each <br />system. The designs included system layouts, pipeline size and length, sprinkler <br />design, estimated installation cost, estimated anrrual cost, using three different <br />payment methods, and estimate<;! crop returns. <br /> <br />Landowners were interviewed before alternative plans were developed. Their <br />anticipated cropping pattern was used in the planning process. These patterns <br />were either 5 years alfalfa, 1 year small grains and 1 year of dry beans or 5 <br />years alfalfa and 2 years small grains. Using this information, the irrigation <br />system plans were based upon a full water supply to alfalfa. <br /> <br />Three general field irrigation system types were used in the development of <br />alternative plans. These were (1) a surface system using corrugations or <br />furrows, (2) a sideroll sprinkler system and (3) a center pivot sprinkler system. <br />It was assumed that tmderground pipeline would be used to transfer water fran the <br />farm turnout to v.here it was needed on the field. <br /> <br />Maps obtained fran the Bureau of Reclamation showed the topography, lands <br />designated by the Bureau as irrigable, and the locations of farm turnouts. Other <br />basic data available were soil maps, aerial photos, irrigation guides and <br />technical guides. <br /> <br />The next step in the planning process was an on site inspection of the <br />field. Indications of archaeological sites, gullies, seep areas and other <br />physical barriers were identified and located on aerial photos. <br /> <br />Soil conditioning indices were developed in the conservation plans for all <br />cropping systems anticipated by the farmers. Conservation practices such as <br />conservation tillage, crop residue, and irrigation water management, are being <br />encouraged in all rotations. All rotations, thus far, have been within <br />acceptable tolerance levels of erosion men under sprinkler systems. <br /> <br />In the future, conservation planning will continue to encourage management <br />and/or structural practices to maintain acceptable erosion rates. If alfalfa is <br />not part of the rotation then such practices as terraces, conservation tillage, <br />dammer/diker implements, grassed water \,ays, and contour farming may be needed. <br />Costs and benefits on a case by case basis will be considered at that time. <br /> <br />-9- <br />