Laserfiche WebLink
<br />0463 <br /> <br />If the existing conveyance facilities could be used for the diversion <br /> <br />of recharge flows, 97,300 acre-feet would need to be diverted from <br /> <br />the river annually to meet the average demands for supplemental <br /> <br />irrigation water at the farm headgates. With this scheme, annual <br /> <br />drain-out losses would be 45,200 acre-feet. These losses are higher <br /> <br />than they would be for the entirely new conveyance system, because <br /> <br />recharge using existing facili~~~" occur closer to the river than <br /> <br />it would with the proposed n~Systtyn. <br />. "- <br />tz:-- -, .c ) <br />'. ..J <br />Based on a combination of ~~w and)existing water conveyance facilities, <br />.. j <br />r-~ <br />an average annual river diversiQh of 87,300 acre-feet is required to <br />r: ~ <br />meet the onfarm requirefuents. /The combination system uses existing <br />f"-..... . / <br />canals in test areas J';~Ii,~ind III (these test areas will be described <br />", J <br />later in the text; te:~'""th~;~ection entitled, "Recharge Potential") <br />(,,~ <br />and uses new canals fa~e remainder of the study area. Drain-out <br /> <br />losses for this scheme average 35,200 acre-feet annually. <br /> <br />Recharge Potential <br /> <br />Test Areas <br /> <br />To evaluate the potential for recharging the ground-water system, four <br />test areas were chosen (Plate 1) and evaluated in as much detail <br /> <br />as time and available data allowed. Recharge facilities were designed <br />for each of the four areas including new canals and diversion works for <br />delivering water, andspreading areas or shallow ponds for transferring <br />the water into the ground. It was assumed that the canals would be <br />