|
<br /> Table 8-106. Ratio of amount of water used to I6nd Table 8-108. Water quality of selected weUo which
<br /> and profit all by level of TDS, RooseveU se!'\le the Roosevelt Irrigation DIstrict.
<br /> Water COl\8e!'\latWn DIstrict.
<br />l\:) EC
<br />Q.:) Twp Range Sec- Sample TDS SAR Wat'er
<br /> TDS Acre Feet Ratio of Net tien Date x 10' Class
<br />00 (mg/l) Acre Feet Per Acre Dollar Return
<br />CO Per Acre Foot IN IE 1 1963 1.7 1019 2.6 C3.S1
<br /> 620 150,000 4.514 35.00 IN 2E 7 1963 2.0 1258 4.3 C3-S2
<br /> 9 1963 2.5 1524 6.9 C4-S2
<br /> 775 150,000 4.514 35.00 2N IE 4 1963 0.9 539 1.2 C3-S1
<br /> 900 150,000 4.514 35.00 IN lW 7 1960 2.0 1223 4.7 C3-S1
<br /> 1000 150,000 4.514 35.00 10 1959 1.4 850 1.3 C3-S1
<br /> 1100 150,000 4.514 35.00 IN 2W 8 1963 2.6 1554 2.7 C4-S1
<br /> 1200 150,000 4.514 35.00 13 1963 5.5 4581
<br /> 1300 150,000 4.514 35.00 15 1963 3.0 2081 5.6 C4-S2
<br /> 1400 150,000 4.514 35.00 20 1963 4.9 3694 7.7 C4-S2
<br /> IN 3W 13 1963 6.3 4570
<br /> 19 1963 7.2 4933
<br /> Table 8-106. Tota! and per acre net profit by TDS 27 1963 5.5 4358
<br /> leve~ RooseveU Water COl\8e!'\lation 28 1963 6.2 4824
<br /> 31 1963 5.5 4324
<br /> DIstrict. IN 4W 20 1963 ~.4 1563 9.6 C4.S1
<br /> 27 1963 7.0 4985
<br /> TDS Profit Per Acre 30 1963 4.7 3981
<br /> (mg/!) (Dollars) (Dollars) 33 1963 6.4 5469
<br /> 36 1963 5.5 4324
<br /> 620 5,249,952 157.97 2N lW 25 1963 0.6 407 3.0 C2-S1
<br /> 775 5,249,952 157.97 26 1963 0.6 337 3.6 C2-S1
<br /> - -
<br /> 900 5,249,952 t57.97 Average 3.8 2836
<br /> 1000 5,249,952 157.97
<br /> 1100 5,249,952 157.97 Source: Smith, H. V., G. E. Draper, and W. H. Fuller, "The
<br /> 1200 5,249,952 157.97 Quality of Arizona Irrigation Waters,n University
<br /> 1300 5,249,952 157.97 of Arizona Experiment Station, Report 223. 1964.
<br /> 1400 5,249,952 157.97
<br />
<br />Table 8-107. Summa'l'l/ statistics, Roosevelt Water
<br />COl\8e!'\lation DIstrict.
<br />
<br />Total Acres
<br />Double Cropped Acres
<br />Annual Total Damages
<br />Annual Per Acre Damages
<br />Annual Damages Per mg!1
<br />Annual Damages per mg/1 Per Acre
<br />
<br />36,196
<br />6,591
<br />I 0
<br />I 0
<br />I 0
<br />I 0
<br />
<br />level of Colorado River water at the diversion point
<br />and approximately the same when the Colorado
<br />reaches 1400 mg/I (1186, 1175, 1206, 1287, 1269, 1300,
<br />and 1881, respectively), Therefore, possible crop
<br />declinations are computed on the basis of a 40,000 ac ft
<br />allotment of CAP water.
<br />
<br />About 81,000 acres are considered for this study
<br />area, Most of the acreage has been classified as
<br />belonging to land class 1. Table 8-110 shows how the
<br />lands were classified along with the amount of acreage
<br />considered available for double cropping. The crops
<br />chosen for RID are contained In Table 8-111.
<br />
<br />Yields of the major crops were collected from
<br />district records. Base yield figures were computed
<br />from the numbers obtained (Table 8-112). These
<br />numbers were used in conjuction with Table 8-118 and
<br />compared to Table 8-1 In order to derive a salinity
<br />declination function for each of the respective crops.
<br />
<br />Table 8-109. Effects of i'llC1'easing saUnity of Central
<br />Arizona Project water when it is
<br />blended into the Roosevelt Irrigation
<br />DIstrict Water (assuming an allocation
<br />of 40,000 <IC ft of Central Arizona
<br />Project water).
<br />
<br />
<br />120,000 ae ft
<br />Roosevelt 40,000 aeft 160,000 aeft
<br />Irrigation Central Arizona Blended Watet
<br />District Project Water TDS (mg/l)
<br />Groundwater TDS (mg/I)
<br />TDS (mg/I)
<br />1300 775 1169
<br />1300 900 1200
<br />1300 1000 1225
<br />1300 1100 1250
<br />1300 1200 1275
<br />1300 1300 1300
<br />1300 1400 1325
<br />
<br />Model runs were then made for each applicable
<br />level of TDS from the resulting blend of water after
<br />the CAP supply Is introduced Into the area, The
<br />results are shown In Table 8.114. A minor change Is
<br />noted in the amount of acreage allocated to alfalfa,
<br />lettuce, and pasture. As salinity increases, both the
<br />production and occupied land area Qf alfalfa decrease.
<br />This occurs in order to release additional area in order
<br />to maintain the production levels of lettuce and
<br />pasture. Overall, these changes are very small and, as
<br />will be observed below, are insignificant.
<br />
<br />190
<br />
<br />
|