Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Another way to evaluate this same issue would be as follows: <br /> <br />Potential McElmo Creek flows <br />due to irrigation return flows <br />(acre feet) <br /> <br />Item Future W/o Alt. 5 Historic <br />Group Ditch Seepage 3,000 0 2,000 <br />Onfarm Ditch Seepage 4,000 l.OOO 1. 000 <br />Deep Percolation lO.OOO 7,000 9,000 <br />Tailwater Runoff 50.000 15.000 45.000 <br />Total 67.000 23.000 57.000 <br /> <br />Thus. with the project you would be depleting 34.000 af/yr <br />of potential stream flows from the basin over historic <br />conditions and 44.000 af/yr from the basin over the almost <br />certain future condition. <br /> <br />This creates several potential project stopper scenarios <br />for the USDA McElmo Creek Salinity Control Unit all of which <br />stem from the argument that you are potentially depleting <br />somewhere between 30,000-35.000 af/yr from the McElmo Creek <br />basin. This depletion unless mitigated could virtually dry the <br />stream by the time it reaches stateline. <br /> <br />Problem 1. What are the impacts to endangered fish in the San <br />Juan River below the McElmo Creek confluence? <br /> <br />Problem 2. What are the impacts to the wetlands along McElmo <br />Creek from the headwaters to its confluence? Has <br />USDA-SCS even inventoried these? <br /> <br />Problem 3. The only stream or wetland mitigation available to <br />McElmo Creek would involve the delivery of Dolores <br />River Water to McElmo Creek for instream flow <br />purpose. <br /> <br />i) Is this acceptable to Reclamation? <br /> <br />ii) Is this acceptable to the Dolores Water <br />Conservancy District? <br /> <br />iii) Is this acceptable to the MVIC? <br /> <br />iv) Is this acceptable to the State? <br /> <br />"("','') 1 ( 8 <br />.:\. ~ . ..) <br /> <br />-3- <br />