<br />Table S-l SUlTlllary of Alternath'es - Big Sandy River Unit Salinity Study, Wyoming
<br />
<br />ITEM
<br />
<br />12
<br />
<br />3A
<br />
<br />3B
<br />
<br />8
<br />NED
<br />
<br />9G!J
<br />
<br />9PY
<br />
<br />10
<br />
<br />13
<br />ED
<br />
<br />11
<br />
<br />Annual Installation
<br />Cost-$Million
<br />Annual OM&R Cost - SMillion
<br />AnnualCostWl1dlifeHabitat:
<br />Mitigation 11 - $Million
<br />Total Annual Cost-$Ml11ion
<br />
<br />.042'Y
<br />.058W
<br />
<br />o
<br />.lD
<br />
<br />.08
<br />.04
<br />
<br />5.88
<br />.75
<br />
<br />2.71
<br />.71
<br />
<br />.14
<br />
<br />.99
<br />.62
<br />
<br />.14
<br />1.75
<br />
<br />.86
<br />.56
<br />
<br />.90
<br />.60
<br />
<br />2.20
<br />o
<br />
<br />1.69
<br />o
<br />
<br />.14
<br />
<br />1.42
<br />
<br />.58
<br />
<br />.83
<br />.32
<br />
<br />2.23
<br />.03
<br />
<br />2.S3
<br />.10
<br />
<br />1.42
<br />.76
<br />
<br />.04
<br />.16
<br />
<br />.14
<br />
<br />6.77 3.56
<br />
<br />.05
<br />1.47
<br />
<br />.09
<br />
<br />.14
<br />
<br />o
<br />
<br />.05
<br />1.47
<br />
<br />.05
<br />.63 1.15
<br />
<br />.14
<br />
<br />.16
<br />
<br />o
<br />
<br />1.59 2.34 1.83
<br />
<br />2.40 2.79 2.18
<br />
<br />Annual Salinity Reduction
<br />Benefitsy -$Million
<br />Increased Agricultural
<br />Benefits - $Million
<br />
<br />ij
<br />
<br />.10
<br />
<br />5.00 2.62
<br />
<br />2,62
<br />
<br />.27
<br />
<br />2.16
<br />
<br />2,42 7.51 7.51
<br />
<br />2.16
<br />
<br />1.01 3.36
<br />
<br />4.52 6.71 3.92
<br />
<br />.03 .03 .34
<br />
<br />Total Annual Benefits
<br />$Million
<br />
<br />4.55 6.74 4.26
<br />
<br />ij
<br />
<br />.13
<br />
<br />.27 .27
<br />
<br />2.89
<br />
<br />.34
<br />
<br />.31 0 0
<br />
<br />.34
<br />
<br />o 0
<br />
<br />HetBenefits-$Milllon
<br />
<br />- - ij
<br />
<br />ij
<br />
<br />.23
<br />
<br />5.27 2.89
<br />
<br />1.14
<br />
<br />2.50
<br />
<br />2.73 7.51 7.51
<br />
<br />2.50
<br />
<br />1.01 3.36
<br />
<br />2.15 3.95 2,08
<br />
<br />70.2 113.4 84.2
<br />
<br />Salt Load Reduction
<br />(x 1,000 Tons)
<br />
<br />(J)
<br />.i>.
<br />
<br />Salinity Reduction at
<br />ImperialOam (mg/l)
<br />
<br />Annual Cost Per Ton of
<br />Salt Reduction ($)
<br />Wetlands--Gain\ +} or loss( ~};
<br />(1,000 Ac,) A tered Only :
<br />
<br />Mitigation--preserveand
<br />enhance wet1ands(1,OOO Ac):
<br />
<br />Increased Terrestrial
<br />Habitat (adjacent to
<br />wet1ands}--(l,OOO Ac.)
<br />
<br />Streamflow Increase/Oecrease:
<br />(1,000 AcFt)
<br />
<br />-- ij
<br />
<br />.07
<br />
<br />-1.50 -.67
<br />
<br />52.9
<br />
<br />33.00
<br />-2.77 :
<br />T.1!f ,
<br />
<br />.86
<br />
<br />.43
<br />
<br />-.2
<br />
<br />42.5
<br />
<br />5.5
<br />
<br />34.40
<br />-.13
<br />=
<br />
<br />.86
<br />
<br />.43
<br />
<br />-.2
<br />
<br />1.03
<br />
<br />1.14 5.17 5.68
<br />
<br />42.9
<br />
<br />34.40
<br />-.13
<br />=
<br />
<br />+7.8
<br />
<br />1.03
<br />
<br />.38 2.21
<br />
<br />'.9
<br />
<br />'.7
<br />
<br />14.3
<br />
<br />8.2
<br />
<br />2.7
<br />
<br />96.3 52.9
<br />
<br />48.0 l24.9 124.9
<br />
<br />4.5
<br />
<br />5.1
<br />
<br />16,0
<br />
<br />16.0
<br />
<br />12.3 81.3
<br />
<br />4.5
<br />
<br />2.2
<br />
<br />14.20
<br />
<br />34.20
<br />
<br />24,50
<br />
<br />25.90
<br />
<br />ij
<br />
<br />.2 10.5 5.5
<br />
<br />33.00
<br />
<br />18.80
<br />
<br />14.70
<br />
<br />46.90
<br />
<br />-.13: +a.02 -2.41: -2.77
<br />=, ..,,----, T.16, T.1!f
<br />
<br />+4.01
<br />3.51i
<br />
<br />.18
<br />
<br />,18 0
<br />
<br />.86 .86 0
<br />
<br />.43 .43 0
<br />
<br />+20.6 +21.6 -4.1
<br />
<br />- ij
<br />
<br />59.30 70.20 67.20
<br />o : -2.77. -2.77
<br />J.b3 : --,-:or : I:oT
<br />
<br />-1.20: -2.77: -2.77:
<br />-=, T.1!f, T.1!f,
<br />
<br />.18
<br />
<br />.36 .86 .86
<br />
<br />11 Good irrigation water management practices.
<br />Y Poor irrigation water management practices.
<br />:y Annual cost wildlife mitigation includes acquistion, installation, operation, maintenance, and replacement costs.
<br />
<br />o
<br />
<br />o
<br />
<br />.18
<br />
<br />.86
<br />
<br />.09
<br />
<br />.18 .42 .42
<br />
<br />.09
<br />
<br />.Og 0
<br />
<br />4/
<br />C) .,
<br />c....:. 'Y
<br />r'
<br />~~, y
<br />...".ij
<br />{.if
<br />
<br />Annual salinity reduction benefits are based on $416,000 per mg/l change at Imperial Oam and $12,495 per 109(1 change at Green River, Wyoming.
<br />See Page 4-7 for details.
<br />Annual funds ellpended in the project area from ell1stfng Conservation Programs. These include $25,500 ($12,200 Agricultural Conservation
<br />Program ASCS) ($13,300 landowners) for installation of conservation measures. Technical assistance pro't'ided by the SCS annually is $16,500.
<br />Annual operation, maintenance, and replacenent cost of the Eden Valley Irrigation and Drainage 01strict.
<br />Continued installation of conservation practices at the present level will maintain on-fann irrigation efficiencies at 35 percent.
<br />Continuation of present level llH&R on the irrigation system will maintain the 82 percent conveyance efficiency. With conveyance,
<br />and on-farm efficiencies remaining essentially the same in the future, no salinity reduction or agricultural benefits are shown in the
<br />table. It is recognized that should the ongoing conservation program funding or OM&R be reduced, irrigat10n eff1ciencies ma.y reduce
<br />a small amount which may result in a small increase of salt from the project area.
<br />
<br />-
<br />
<br />o
<br />
<br />.09
<br />
<br />.43
<br />
<br />o
<br />
<br />.7
<br />
<br />+4.2
<br />
<br />'.8
<br />
<br />+.6 +26.2 +26.2
<br />
<br />+.7 -13.4
<br />
<br />....-=,~,~....'""""
<br />
<br />~ ",'
<br />
<br />~
<br />
<br />~-
<br />
<br />,,,",,.-
<br />
<br />, ,_ ._......-..,.,.",....,..._-.J
<br />
|