Laserfiche WebLink
<br />(~ <br />...:;> <br />..... <br />..... <br />::'1 Alternative 3 ~ U1anagement of time of set and use of cut-back flow rate) <br />C:;J <br /> <br />2 The third level of analysis consisted of using recomnended management <br /> <br />3 practices for time of set and use of cut-back flow rate. The practice <br /> <br />4 of cut-back irrigation is where the time of set was divided into one-third <br /> <br />5 of the time at twice the recommended flow rate and t~lo-thirds of the time <br /> <br />6 at the recommended flow rate. Physical improvements for this level of <br /> <br />7 improvement consist of installation of 80 percent of all recommended <br /> <br />8 systems improvements. A change of irrigation method to drip and sprinkler <br /> <br />9 methods are recommended on 5,000 acres. <br /> <br />10 Alternative 4 - This alternative level of improvement is a composite <br /> <br />I i of the other three alternatives and is the tentatively recommended <br /> <br />12 plan subject to discussion with the local people. It represents a <br /> <br />13 variable participation in the program according to the owner's desires <br /> <br />14 and his capability to implement improvements. It assumes that 20 per- <br /> <br />15 <br />16 <br /> <br />cent of the acreage would remain at the present level of water management; <br /> <br />20 percent of the area would achieve alternative level 1; 40 percent of <br /> <br />17 <br />18 <br /> <br />the area would be raised to alternative level 2; 20 percent of the area <br /> <br />would go to alternative Level 3, and 1,000 acres of drip and sprinkler <br /> <br />19 <br /> <br />systems would be installed. <br /> <br />20 <br /> <br />A tabulation of on~farm system improvements for the four improvement <br /> <br />21 <br /> <br />I eve Is fo 1 lows. <br /> <br />38 <br />