WSP05176

• File Number: 8276.100
• Description: Grand Valley Unit - Colorado River Basin Salinity Project
• State: CO
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 4/15/1978
• Title: News Articles/Press Releases -- April 1978 - August 1992
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: News Article/Press Release

an
ClO
ClO
C\I
o
o

Grand Valley Unit
Stage Two
Newsletter - January 1983

GRAND VALLEY UNIT
The Grand Valley Unit is a c{wlponent of the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project and
was authorized for construction by the Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Act of 1974, Public
Law 93-320. Technical investigations to date
indicate that the Grand Valley area contributes an
estimated 580,000 tons of salt per year to the
Colorado River system.

Stage One. As an initial stage (Stage One) of
development aimed at reducing this salt loading,
about 7 miles of the Government Highline Canal
northwest of Fruits have been concrete-lined; and
work is currently underway to consolidate 34 miles
of open laterals into 29 miles of pipe. Data is
being collected in this Stage One area to assess
the effect iveness of init ial development in
reducing salt loading to the Colorado River.

Stage Two. Stage Two investigations which focus
on the remainder of the Grand Valley outside the
Stage One area, began in November 1981 and include
various hydrologic, engineering, and environmental
studies as well as formulation and evaluation of
alternative plans.

To assist in the evaluation and comparison of
alternatives, the future as it would occur without
Bureau of Reclamation salinity control measures is
forecast. Under this condition, if salinity
improvement were to be realized, it would involve
other structural or nonstructural alternatives and
would be performed by other entities.

Out of many salinity control measures originally
considered, the following alternatives were found
to be the most viable.

Lateral Improvement: This plan involves
improvement of lateral ~ystems under both the
private and Federal canal systems in the
Grand Valley area to reduce seepage.
Improvements would include concrete lining
and/or piping the laterals.

Laterals proposed for improvement include
those of the Stub and Price Ditches and of
the Orchard Mesa, Grand Valley, and Govern-
ment Highline Canals. Some 700 laterals
totaling about 500 miles in length could be
part of this plan. Over 10,000 irrigators
are currently receiving water from the
private laterals under consideration.
Laterals under the Redlands canals would not
be part of this alternat ive, nor would
laterals already improved under Department of
Agriculture programs.

Canal Seepage Reduction: Two canal seepage
reduction options have been identified under
this alternative--canal lining and a canal
seepage barrier.

In the canal lining
reduced by either
lining. Some 200

option, seepage would be
concrete or membrane
miles of private and

Federal canals serving approximately 60,000
acres are under consideration for this plan.

The barrier option would involve the placement
of an impermeable material within the downslope
canal embankment. The material would function
as an underground dam, stopping canal seepage
from moving down-gradient toward the Colorado
River. The barrier would only be considered
for port ions of the Government Highline Canal
and the Kiefer Extension.

Systems Combining: This plan involves the
water management and salinity reduction
opportunities that would result f~om combining
canal systems in the Grand Valley. By com-
bining two or more canals into one, laterals of
the upper canal would be extended and combined
with those of the lower system. The new
laterals would be concrete lined and lor piped.

The three structural plans discussed above
would include safety features such as fencing
and escape ladders on canals. Measures to
offset expected losses to wetlands will also be
considered. These measures could include items
such as development of wildlife habitat along
the Colorado River or elsewhere in the valley.

ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING ~ETINGS
The Bureau of Reclamation held two environmental
scoping meetings--one in Fruita on December 7, 1982,
and one in Clifton on December 9, 1982. These
sessions were held as part of an ongoing process to
familiarize the public with planning studies on the
remainder of the unit and to obtain public partici-
pation in identifying environmental concerns and
issues associated with alternative plans.

Presentations included a summarization of the status
of planning studies, an explanat ion of the scoping
process, and descriptions of the three structural
alternatives which included slides showing the
effect, the total investment, and the cost effec-
tiveness associated with various increments.

In a workshop setting, public participants were
asked to identify concerns and issues and to suggest
other alternatives for consideration. The systems
combining alternative elicited the most interest and
response from meeting participants. Administration
of a combined system and issues associated with
water rights appeared to be the major concerns.
Another primary COnCl!rn which applied to all the
alternatives was that wildlife measures be included
in salinity control plans to offset losses to
wildlife. The concerns, issues, and suggestions are
listed on Attachment 1.

Ongoing Field Investigations
Under a monitoring program for Stage One, water
level measurements ane samples are taken bimonthly
from observation wells to provide base data for
evaluating the effects on the ground-water flows and
quality of Stage One improvements. In addition to
ground-water monitoring, the program includes weekly
measurements of water quantity and quality in