My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP02732
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP02732
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:46:38 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:19:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8276.852
Description
Moapa Valley Unit - Colorado River Salinity Control Program
State
NV
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
2/1/1981
Title
Salinity Control and Environmental Assessment
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
EIS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
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 />Two alternative plans were identified. The first plan, Alternative 1, <br />minimizes structural works. The second plan, Alternative 2, maximizes <br />irrigation efficiency and salt load reduction. This latter plan is desig- <br />nated the "Environmental Quality Plan" and provides the greatest reduction <br />in salt loading. Net economic benefits are largely derived from reduced <br />salinity. This results in the "Environmental Quality Plan" yielding the <br />highest net benefits; therefore, Alternative 2 is also identified as the <br />"Economic Development Plan." All alternatives are evaluated for a 25-year <br />project life at seven and three-eighths percent interest after a ten-year <br />installation period. The ongoing conservation program is assumed to con- <br />tinue for all alternative conditions. Fo110wup technical assistance is <br />necessary to maintain present irrigation efficiency with future conditions. <br /> <br />The major practice in both alternative plans is onfarm irrigation <br />water management. The off-farm conveyance system improvement alternatives <br />were identified by the SCS and the Clark Conservation District in August <br />1978 and are used in this study. <br /> <br />The alternatives consider fish and wildlife resources. Assessment of <br />fish, wildlife and recreation, etc. are located in the Environmental Evaluat- <br />ion Appendices. The impact on the visual resource and its quality was con- <br />sidered. The proposed alternatives will not advers1y impact these resources. <br /> <br />Other nonreturn flow and concentrated return flow uses of water from <br />irrigated lands were examined. Water not used for irrigation may be allocated <br />for industrial use or power generation purposes. Saline waters from return <br />flows could be used to develop additional wildlife habitat. Return flow <br />ditches presently provide some wildlife habitat. Flow in these ditches will <br />be reduced and result in minimal habitat disturbance. <br /> <br />The proposed onfarm measures would not result in land modification below <br />plow depth and therefore, will not effect cultural resources beyond present <br />agr. .u1tura1 activity. <br /> <br />Future Without Salinity Program <br /> <br />The future without program for salinity control condition is based <br />on projected changes without implementation of a salinity control program. <br />Proj";;ted land use change from agricultural to urban is 425 acres. Some <br />85 acres are estimated for building lots and the remainder for use as <br />small pastures, lawns and gardens. <br /> <br />Irrigated land considered for this alternative is 4,897 acres distributed <br />as fo 11 ows: <br /> <br />48% alfa1 fa <br />25% pas ture <br /> <br />20% barley <br />7% sudan grass <br /> <br />No change in production levels are considered. Changes in onfarm irri- <br />gation systems would result from ongoing conservation programs. <br /> <br />37 <br /> <br />OOZ717 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.