Laserfiche WebLink
<br />,.;~:"" <br />~-r::'iJ <br /> <br />'""" <br />I-" <br />Ul <br />t'-' <br /> <br />f:~~~ib <br /> <br />~f~i~;~ <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />--- <br /> <br />11. Comment: Page 1-76. paragraph 2. - We believe that the assist- <br />ance provided by the Department of Agriculture sh<<;luld be recognized <br />as an essential step in obtaining the goals of th~ IMS program. We <br />understand the IMS program predicts when to irrigate and how much <br />water to apply. An important step in improving on-farm irrigation <br />efficiencies is the technical assistance provided: to the landowner <br />by the SCS through the local Soil Conservation District. This assist- <br />ance enables the landowner to properly plan and apply on-farm irriga- <br />tion practices to effectively and efficiently use the irrigation water <br />once it is delivered to his property. <br /> <br />Reply: USDA assistance is acknowledged in the text as requested. <br />See chapter I, section D.2.b. [4] Onfarm Irrigation Systems and <br />Management Improvement. <br /> <br />12. Comment: Page 1-83-84. - We believe ,the discussion on the Grand <br />Valley IMS program would be strengthened by further discussion of.the <br />IMS program in relation to technical assistance provided by the SCS <br />for on-farm irrigation improvements. <br /> <br />Reply: Additional discussion concerning the technical assistance by <br />the SCS for on farm irrigation improvements in the IMS program has been <br />added to chapter I. See chapter I. section D.2.b. [4] Onfarm Irriga- <br />tion Syst"ems and Management linprovement. <br /> <br />13. Comment: We feel it is not possible to increase overall effi- <br />ciency nearly 30 percent with the IMS program as projected for the <br />Grand Valley are.a. With the use of cutback heads, new systems. a high <br />level of management, and pump-back facilities. it may be possible to <br />get 60 percent plus efficiency; however. it is not practical to obtain <br />thiS when 48 percent of the operators are part-time farmers and water <br />is locally plentiful and inexpensive. The 60 percent efficiency should <br />be defined and the information used to project 60 percent on-farm effi- <br />ciency with IMS should be referenced. ' <br /> <br />Reply: This comment is answered in the reply to comment No. 2 of this <br />leUer. <br /> <br />14. Comment: Pages 1-108 through 1-135.- This section represents a <br />description of the action planned on a number of irrigation and diffuse <br />source control units. We estimate there are 705,000 acres of irrigated <br />acreage in these units. However, there is very little. if any. cover- <br />age in the EIS of these units of on-farm irrigation efficiency improve- <br />ment programs of USDA. In each of these areas there is a potential to <br />increase irrigation efficiency if systems are improved and water sup- <br />plies are assured. About 60 percent of the water, diverted to these <br />areas is return flow (based on preliminary SCS investigations). <br /> <br /> <br />17 <br />