Laserfiche WebLink
<br />The current implementation schedule is controlled by annual <br />~~ appropriations. While USDA developed a modified implementation schedule in <br />~, 1982, funding has only supported the two ongoing projects. Other project <br />~ implementation starts are scheduled to be phased in over a period of years as <br />tJ program funding levels increase. <br /> <br />A new implementation schedule was formulated as a result of new <br />legislation, closer coordination with Reclamation, and inputs from the Basin <br />States. The new implementation schedule is based upon projected salt load <br />reduction needs, cost-effectiveness analysis, the likelihood of Federal <br />funding, and Basin Fund repayment capability. <br /> <br />Monitoring and evaluation of the accomplishments of USDA actions in <br />salinity control has a threefold objective. First and most important is to <br />develop information about actual (rather than planned) on-farm effects that <br />have occurred in the area. This information will enable farmers <br />to make informed choices about voluntary implementation of salinity control <br />practices. The information includes cost of practices, changes in water use, <br />labor use, and other farm inputs, and finally, observed changes in crop yield <br />and potential changes in net farm income. The second purpose is to enable SCS <br />to confirm or correct the data used to plan salinity control projects to do a <br />more reliable job of planning other projects. The final purpose is to collect <br />data to be used to evaluate the overall effectiveness and efficiency of USDA <br />salinity control activities from a program standpoint. <br /> <br />Although continuing to be hampered by shortage of staff and funding, <br />SCS monitoring and evaluation activities moved ahead sharply during fiscal <br />year 1985. In the Grand valley Unit in Colorado, 16 automated irrigation <br />monitoring and evaluation sites are now operational, and full-season <br />irrigation data have been collected on 13 fields. Development of the software <br />to process the monitoring and evaluation data proved to be a much larger task <br />than initially estimated. Significant progress was made toward developing the <br />needed software, but additional programming time will be required. <br /> <br />On the Uinta Basin Unit in Utah, ground water tubes have been <br />installed on 15 farms, and efforts will begin to monitor ground water levels <br />using neutron probes. Water inflow and outflow measurements on these farms <br />will be combined with data from six potential evapotranspiration sites to <br />measure deep percolation. The SCS staff is also working with Cooperative <br />Extension in Utah to establish and monitor progress in irrigation water <br />management on four farms. <br /> <br />A plan of study for the economics monitoring and evaluation effort <br />was developed and approved for the Grand Valley Unit, and a worksheet to <br />collect farm operations data was developed and field tested, and is ready for <br />the staff to begin collecting data regarding the on-farm effect of salinity <br />reduction activities. <br /> <br />wildlife habitat monitoring and evaluation efforts have been <br />strongly pushed during fY 1985. Baseline wildlife habitat conditions have <br />been established for 30 additional sites in the Uinta unit bringing the total <br />sites evaluated to 60. Microcomputer programs have also been developed to <br />calculate a habitat suitability index (HS1) for six species for each of the <br />sites. These programs will enable the ready comparison of site habitat <br />condition over time. On the Grand valley Unit, a Wildlife M&E Annual Report <br /> <br />VII-lO <br /> <br />.... <br />