My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07005
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:25:19 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:02:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8112.600
Description
Arkansas White Red Basins Interagency Committee - AWRBIAC -- Reports
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
1/1/1978
Title
Specific Problem Analysis Summary Report - 1975 National Assessment of Water and Related Land Resources - Part 1 of 2
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
97
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />o <br />(- ) <br />fV <br />~ <br />-J. <br />vi <br /> <br />", <br /> <br />I <br />, <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />,- <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />MISSOURI <br /> <br />The State of Missouri does not necessarily agree or dissgree <br />with all conclusions because of the limited State data available. <br />As State water planning work progresses, refined dats and projec- <br />tions will be available and the State of Missouri can better <br />evaluste the results of the National Water Assessment. <br /> <br />Springfield and Joplin areas are recognized to have major vater <br />resource problems which need further attention. <br /> <br />It is recommended that all future basin planning activities of <br />this type present data on a State-by-State basis to make the basin <br />projections and conclusions more useable to individual States. <br /> <br />NEW MEXICO <br /> <br />The Modified Centrsl Case (MCC) data provided by WRC were com- <br />piled for aggregated subareas which in most cases ignored stste <br />boundaries and hydrologic areas within states. Comparison of SRF <br />and MCC data in New Mexico could not be made, thus, differences could <br />not be identified. For the most part, MCC data have no useful appli- <br />cation in New Mexico in providing economic, water and related land <br />resource statistical information. <br /> <br />Existing laws, regulations, and compacts that relate to water <br />use within scates or between states appear to be ignored. State lsws <br />and interstate compacts affect present and future use of water supplies <br />and both are important in determining availability of these supplies <br />for various uses. <br /> <br />The State'of New Mexico recommends future studies include state <br />data and consider tn,;ieg'al-,constraints whien affeCt ~..,'~se 01 <br />wat'ei'supplies. <br /> <br />During Activity 3, Phase II, two Group A problems in the AWR <br />Region in New Mexico were defined. Problem No. I noted several <br />problem issues and effects which are common throughout the area and <br />Problem No. 2 is concerned with dwindling groundwater supplies in <br />areas where pumping exceeds recharge and water levels are being lowered. <br /> <br />Problem No. I. Common problems throughout the area are limited <br />surface-VaTer Buppi~es; flooding in urban and rural areas, erosion of <br />the landscape; siltation and sedimentation in stream channels and <br />reservoir areas. <br /> <br />17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.