|
<br /> Table 8-9/,. Cropping and production pattem change.. I4nds IlUpplemental to Salt River Project.
<br />t~
<br />~ Total Dissolved Solids (mg/!)
<br />O~ Crops 565 900 1100 1400
<br />t..""
<br /> Production Land Use Production Land Use Production Land Use Production Land Use
<br /> (l'ons) (Acres) (Tons) (Acres) (fons) (Acres) (fons) (Acres)
<br /> Alfalfa 13,500 2,304 13,500 2,304 13,500 2,304 13 ,500 2,304
<br /> Cottona 13,750 6,307 13,750 6,307 13,750 6,307 13,750 6,307
<br /> Barley 3,850 1,944 3.850 1,944 3,850 1,944 3,850 1,944
<br /> Wheat 7,777 3,014 7,777 3,014 7,777 3,014 7,777 3,014
<br /> Sorghum 9,256 4,535 9,256 4,535 9,256 4,535 9,256 4,535
<br /> Lettuce 55,000 4,863 55,000 4,863 55,000 4,863 55,000 4,863
<br /> Onion 7,916 451 7,916 451 7,916 451 7,916 451
<br /> Sugar Beets 18,000 909 18,000 909 18,000 909 18,000 909
<br /> Total 24,327 24,327 24,327 24,327
<br /> D. C. Fallow 2,032 2,032 2,032 2,032
<br /> a48Q.pound bales.
<br />
<br />
<br />Table 8-95. Ratio of amount of water used to I4nd Table 8.98. Water <}lJQ.Aty of .elected weU. in the
<br /> and profit all by level of IDS, I4nds Roo.eveU Water CO'II8ervationDistrict.
<br /> IlUpplemental to Salt River Project.
<br />TDS Acre Feet Ratio of Net See- Sample EC Water
<br />Acre Feet Dollar Return TDS SAR
<br />(mg/I) Per Acre Per Acre Foot Twp Range tiOD Date x 103 Class
<br /> IN 6E 4 1966 1.2 780 4.7 C3-S1
<br />565 110,000 4.520 45.30 4 1960 1.2 835 4.9 C3-S1
<br />900 110,000 4.520 45.30 15 1963 1.7 931 4.1 C3-SI
<br />1100 110,000 4.520 45.30 17 1959 1.5 740 5.5 C3-S2
<br />1400 110,000 4.520 45.30 22 1961 1.1 639 8.6 C3-S2
<br /> 26 1959 1.1 734 8.5 C3-S2
<br /> 26 1959 1.2 655 9.4 0-S2
<br /> 34 1967 0.8 520 4.7 C3-SI
<br /> IS 6E 10 1961 1.7 931 2.8 C3-S1
<br /> 13 1956 1.2 850 1.3 C3-S1
<br />Table 8-96. Total and per acre net profit by IDS 21 1959 1.3 641 2.8 C3-S1
<br /> leve4 I4nds IlUpplemental to. Salt River 2S 6E 2 1950 1.0 681 1.6 C3-SI
<br /> Project. 2 1950 1.4 993 1.5 C3-SI
<br /> 9 1950 1.4 977 1.9 C3-S1
<br />TOO Profit Per Acre 28 1951 0.9 638 2.5 C3-S2
<br /> 32 1957 0.8 693 7.0 C3-S2
<br />(rog/I) (Dollars) (Dollars) - - - -
<br /> Average 1.2 765 4.5 C3-S1
<br />565 4,982,678 204.81
<br />900 4,982,678 204.81 Source: Smith, H. V., G. E. Draper, and W..H. Fuller, "The
<br />1100 4,982,678 204.81 Quality of Arizona hrigation Waters:' University
<br />1400 4,982,678 204.81 of Arizona Experiment Station, Report 223, 1964.
<br />
<br />Total Acres
<br />Double Cropped Acres
<br />Annual Total Damages
<br />Annual Per Acre Damages
<br />Annual Damages per mgfl
<br />Annual Damages Per mgfI Per Acre
<br />
<br />26,359
<br />7,919
<br />$ 0
<br />$ 0
<br />$ 0
<br />$ 0
<br />
<br />water quality depending upon how it is delivered to
<br />the district. If the CAP water is mixed with the SRP
<br />surface water above Granite Reef Dam (or Orme Dam)
<br />the dilution will be very beneficial to RWCD, as shown
<br />in Tabte 8-99. However, if the CAP water is delivered
<br />directly to the RWCD system, the resulting blend will .
<br />be significantly higher in TDS as shown in TaMe
<br />8-100.
<br />
<br />Table 8-97. Sum1lUJf"/I .tatistic., I4nds IlUpplemental
<br />to Salt River Project.
<br />
<br />The soils of the RWCD are assigned to drainage
<br />groups in Table 8-101 where approximately 86,000
<br />total acres are considered as the estimated cropland
<br />
<br />
<br />185
<br />
|