My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP03981
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
4001-5000
>
WSP03981
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:53:05 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:03:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8509
Description
Closed Basin Division
State
CO
Basin
Rio Grande
Water Division
3
Date
3/1/1979
Author
Ronald Rhoade - US D
Title
Economic Analysis of Utilizing Corner Areas of Center Pivot Irrigated fields for Wildlife Habitat in the San Luis Valley
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
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 />CJ';l <br /> <br />C\J <br />1""'l <br />, 7"l <br />C) <br /> <br />I <br />,) <br /> <br />ECDNOMIC ANALYSIS OF lITILIZING CDRNER AREAS OF CENTER PIVOT IRRIGATED FIELDS <br />FOR WILDLIFE HABITAT IN TIlE SAN LUIS VALLEY - CDLORAOO. By Ronald R. Rhoade; <br />Natural Resource Economics Division, Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives <br />Service; lJ.S. Department of Agriculture; Washington, D.C. 20250; March 1979. <br /> <br />ABSTRACf <br /> <br />Center pivot irrigation systems leave field comers unirrigated. Four alter- <br />natives were analyzed for utilizing field comers in the San Luis Valley: <br />(1) Irrigation by conventional surface system; (2) Idle comers, with culti- <br />vation to control weeds; (3) Provide permanent cover for comers; and (4) <br />Mechanical comer irrigation system in combination with the center pivot. <br />Alternative 4 was most profitable for the farmer but required the highest <br />investment. Benefits from Alternative 3 included reduced wind erosion, con- <br />trol of noxious weeds and increased wildlife habitat. These benefits, some <br />of which would accrue to nonfa:rmers, were not evaluated monetarily. <br /> <br />Keywords: Colorado; irrigation; center pivot; comer use; wildlife habitat. <br /> <br />******************************************************************* <br />* This paper was prepared for limited distribution to the * <br />* research community outside the U.S. Department of Agriculture. * <br />* The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of ESCS * <br />* or USDA, * <br />******************************************************************* <br /> <br />ACKNOWLEDGlENTS <br /> <br />The author wishes to recognize the cooperation and assistance provided by <br />the Center Colorado Soil Conservation Service field office staff, especially <br />Richard Sparks and AcieGurmels. Also recognition is given to the local <br />growers and dealers who gave assistance and finally to the San Luis Valley <br />Potato Administrative Committee and the San Luis Valley Farm and Ranch <br />Management Association for providing necessary data for developing the <br />budgets in this document. <br /> <br />CON1ENTS <br /> <br />SlIITDllaT)' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 <br />Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 4 <br />Problems Associated with Center Pivot and Comer Irrigation <br />in the San Luis Valley.,...........................,.,..,....,...,.... 8 <br />Alternatives for Center Pivot Use and Corner Management.................ll <br /> <br />Conclusions.......... .................................................. .14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.