Laserfiche WebLink
<br />o <br />w::- <br />I\) <br />~ <br /> <br />-4- <br /> <br />local conditions will dictate that some measures will be <br />more feasible than others. Furthermore, the measures best <br />suited to an area's conditions change with the level of <br />control scheduled in the area. For example, in an irrigated <br />area contributing 500,000 Mgm to the river system annually, <br />of which 20 percent is to be controlled, lining several <br />miles of the major canals may be the least costly alter- <br />native. However, if. the. desired level of salinity control <br />was increased to 60 percent, the optimal salinity control <br />strategy may involve canal lining as well as several forms <br />of on-farm improvements. Any time more than a single <br />salinity control measure is employed, the relationship <br />between the marginal costs of control and the marginal <br />reductions in salinity will increase with the scale or <br />level of the program (Walker, 1978). Consequently, the most <br />important decision regarding salinity control in the Colorado <br />River Basin is the optimal level and manner of abatement to <br />be achieved at each salinity source. <br /> <br />OBJECTIVES OF INVESTIGATION <br />The principal objective of this research effort is to <br />apply an optimizational analysis to salinity control plan- <br />ning in the upper Colorado River Basin (UCRB) in order to <br />identify the most cost-effective strategies for alleviating <br />salinity detriments downstream. Intermediate goals of the <br />project may be summarized as fellows: <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />