Laserfiche WebLink
<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 /> <br />"r,'4 ('",') <br />~,) l': .'.'H v U oj <br /> <br />facilities would be necessary. Rights to the water re- <br />sources to be reallocated, except to the extent needed for <br />domesti c and stockwateri ng uses, woul d be acqui red by <br />purchase, or otherwise. Nonirrigation uses by those lands <br />would continue. There may be additional sources of ground <br />water underlying marginal lands outside the High Plains <br />area in each state that could be similarly reallocated to <br />the High Plains. <br /> <br />A reallocation of water resources from agricultural uses to <br />energy uses through purchase and transfer of water rights <br />is al ready in progress in other areas, Utah for example. <br />The same general concept but for agricultural use in dif- <br />ferent areas is suggested here. <br /> <br />The advantages as compared to interstate, interbasin trans- <br />fers of surface water from "adjacent areas" such as the <br />Missouri River and streams in Arkansas, appear to be among <br />others: <br /> <br />o The sources are much closer and higher in elevations, <br />reducing construction, pumping and other costs, and <br />conveyance losses. <br /> <br />o The well fields and conveyance facilities could be <br />staged over time, avoiding very large one-time invest- <br />ment, all necessary water rights on surface irrigation <br />development rights would be acquired initially. <br /> <br />o Large terminal storage reservoirs would not be necessary, <br />decreasing not only investment and operating costs but <br />also evaporative losses. <br /> <br />o It could be implemented more rapidly than any plan <br />involving major interstate transfers. <br /> <br />15 <br />