Laserfiche WebLink
<br />:") <br />.::;.> <br />~ <br />..-! <br /> <br />concrete-lined and cross-drainage facilities were <br />constructed. In addition, 13 open channel laterals <br />were consolidated into 12 pipe laterals and a moss <br />and debris removal structure was placed at the <br />beginning of the canal lining. <br /> <br />Construction of Stage One was essentially completed <br />in April 1983 at a construction cost of about $28 <br />million; it resulted in a reduction in salt loading <br />to the Colorado River of about 21,900 tons annually <br />and a decrease in salinity at Imperial Dam of about <br />2.0 milligrams per liter (mg/L). at a cost <br />effectiveness of $86 per ton. <br /> <br />Hydrosalinity monitoring of Stage One improvements <br />began in 1981 and continued through 1984. Under <br />the 1976 through 1984 monitoring program, water <br />table measurements and water samples were taken <br />from observation wells in the study area, a <br />hydrologically isolated basin. Outflow and <br />electrical conductivity were continuously recorded. <br />Inflow and outflow data and electrical conductivity <br />in the canals in the study area were also recorded. <br />Data were used for evaluating the effects of all <br />Stage One improvements on ground- and surface-water <br />flows and quality. <br /> <br />Analysis of the monitoring data indicated that <br />canal and lateral seepage was decreased by <br />approximately 5,700 acre-feet and that salt loading <br />to the Colorado River decreased by approximately <br />21,900 tons, supporting recommendations for <br />initiating construction of Stage Two. <br /> <br />Wildlife was monitored to determine the effect of <br />Stage One on both wildlife habitat and populations <br />and recreation associated with wildlife. <br /> <br />Monitoring of wildlife habitat and populations was <br />conducted between 1981 and 1984 under a contract" <br />with the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Monitoring <br />results showed that replacing earth laterals with <br />pipe caused natural vegetation to be cleared on <br />approximately 200 acres. and more than one-half of <br />the cottonwood trees along the laterals were lost. <br />The acreage of marsh and shrub lands declined 6 to 8 <br />percent in Stage One. Croplands actually <br />increased, but vegetation bordering croplands <br />declined by approximately 50 percent. <br /> <br />Wildlife use along the lined canal and laterals <br />also declined. Water available to some native <br />vegetation areas decreased dramatically following <br />lining the canal or placing the laterals in pipes. <br />Seepage areas below the canal and laterals have a <br />greatly diminished water supply. Washes have <br />either remained unchanged or have experienced <br />increased flows during the irrigation season from <br />spillage from canal wastewater and decreased flows <br />during the nonirrigation season from decreased <br />ground-water flows. <br /> <br />Grand Valley Unit <br />October 1986 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br /> <br />Monitoring results supported recommendations for <br />wildlife habitat compensation of Stage Two. <br /> <br />STAGE TWO <br /> <br />Beginning in <br />investigations <br />alternatives <br />measures other <br />were minimally <br /> <br />Novemher 1981, Stage Two <br />included reevaluating various <br />and analyzing salinity control <br />than lining. since nonlining options <br />studied b~fore authorization. <br /> <br />The Stage Two plan covers the remaining canal and <br />lateral systems in the valley exclusive of the <br />Stage One area (see map). In addition to Stage <br />One, areas excluded from Stage Two include the <br />Redlands and the Orchard Mesa Power Canal. The <br />plan provides for installing pipe laterals in the <br />private and Federal systems within the entire Stage <br />Two area and lining the west end, middle. and east <br />end portions of the Gove"rnment Highline Canal. The <br />west end portion of the canal and laterals will be <br />constructed first. Construction is planned <br />beginning the fall of 1986. <br /> <br />Construction costs for Btage Two are estimated at <br />approximately $200 mill "ion based on January 1985 <br />appraisal-level prices. Implementing the plan <br />would result in a reduction in salt loading to the <br />Colorado River of about [39,500 tons per year and a <br />decrease in salinity at Imperial Dam of about 12.7 <br />mg/L. at a cost effectiveness of $92 per ton. <br /> <br />Replacement measures for wildlife habitat were <br />authorized by Congress under Public Law 98-569. <br /> <br />STATISTICS FOR TOTAL GRM~D VALLEY UNIT <br /> <br />Construction costs for Stage One plus Stage Two are <br />estimated at about $230 million based on January <br />1985 appraisal-level prices. Implementing both <br />stages would resuLt in a reduction in salt loading <br />to the Colorado River of about 161,400 tons <br />annually and a decrease in salinity at Imperial Dam <br />of about 14.7 mg/L. at a cost effectiveness of $91 <br />per ton. <br /> <br />FINAL EIS <br /> <br />The final environmental impact statement, which <br />describes alternatives for the construction and <br />operation of the Grand ValLey Unit, was filed with <br />the Environmental Protection Agency on May 23, <br />1986. <br /> <br />LOCAL INTEREST <br /> <br />The Grand Valley Salinity Coordinating Committee <br />meets three times a year at the Grand Junction <br />Projects Office and is open to all persons and <br />agencies interested in c:ttending. The purpose of <br />the committee is to coordinate salinity studies in <br />the Grand Valley and to disseminate information to <br />the public. <br /> <br />Bureau of Reclamation <br />P.O. Box 1889 <br />Grand Junction, CO 81502 <br /> <br />242-8621 <br />