|
<br />iiiJii;Z':i;;,c,,;,,~'.':.,-;{': _"~,f"".,'-n;'~..;.,"" d .1"-'"
<br />
<br />co
<br />(j,)
<br />~
<br />C..l
<br />C,:)
<br />
<br />~' '""
<br />'-'
<br />
<br />t~.:
<br />
<br />i
<br />
<br />'.,
<br />~
<br />: t~
<br />
<br />
<br />~
<br />,;
<br />'>
<br />
<br />c
<br />",-
<br />I t
<br />1;i
<br />~
<br />~
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I;
<br />I
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />l.
<br />
<br />: ~
<br />"
<br />~
<br />~
<br />1,
<br />,
<br />-~
<br />
<br />~
<br />, ~
<br />,-
<br />
<br />-l
<br />l
<br />'j
<br />, ,~
<br />! 1
<br />,
<br />
<br />:'
<br />
<br />The scs report 1/ on the Rock Creek Area drainage estimates a
<br />recove:ry of aboUt 15,000 to 20,000 acre-feet of water a year by
<br />draining (lCJNering the water table to a depth of eight feet) about
<br />30,000 acres of wet meadCM and pasture land. Assuming that a like
<br />arrount of water could be salvaged fran all native hay areas of the
<br />study area, about 68,000 acre-feet of water a year would be available.
<br />Again, this would preclude any profitable use of the land drained,
<br />which is unrealistic. A good portion of this land does not have
<br />surface water rights or is dependent upon a high water table and
<br />would be unproductive without irrigation. Unless canpensation can
<br />be made to present landa.vners for loss of production, large scale
<br />drainage to salvage water for daNnstream use should not be attempted.
<br />
<br />The SCS colorado Biologist estimated that about 12,000 acres of
<br />wetland in the study area should not be drained for biological
<br />reasons. This land is largely adjacent to streams, creeks and
<br />drainages, artesian wells or already in national wildlife areas.
<br />Mainly this land is valuable for ducks, geese and other water birds
<br />and animals. This 12,000 acres are not a part of the 91,000 acres
<br />of native or wet meadCM and pasture. Further1rore, drainage of land,
<br />other than the 12,000 acres, would actually benefit waterfCMl -
<br />providing same source of permanent water rather than the no:rmal
<br />seasonally flooded areas. Open drains should be encouraged as
<br />they provide the open water desirable for waterfCMl.
<br />
<br />In sll!l'ltlaJ:Y, it appears that the logical solution to the problem of
<br />relatively unproductive meadc:w land lies presently in working with
<br />indiVidual landa.vners on a voluntcuy meadCM improvement program.
<br />Same progress is being made in this respect in the local soil con-
<br />servation districts I conservation program. This subject is dis-
<br />cussed further under the fann needs drainage section of this report.
<br />
<br />STUDY ITEM 11 - PREPARE ESTIMm'ES BY COUNTIES FDR eN-THE-FARM NEEDS
<br />OF LAND LE\lELING, CANAL AND DITCH LINING, IRRIGATION PIPELINES, AND
<br />SMALL IRRIGATION STRUCTURES.
<br />
<br />The data for on-the-fann needs were obtained fran a sarrple of repre-
<br />sentative farms, which were expanded on an acreage basis to cover
<br />the study area. One hundred and eleven fanners were contacted.
<br />They were asked what the needs of their land were with respect to
<br />four practices: land leveling, ditch lining, irrigation pipelines,
<br />and small irrigation structures. They were asked what arrount of
<br />these practices they would perfom in the next 10 years with and
<br />without government cost-sharing of at least 50 percent. (Table 7
<br />shows by counties the results of the sarrple. This table does not
<br />represent specific carrrnitrrents but it is supported by individual
<br />data sheets fran fanners on file at the SCS office at Monte Vista,
<br />Colorado. )
<br />
<br />y
<br />
<br />See reference 2
<br />
<br />22
<br />
<br />
|