|
<br />Thb'" 8-77. Sho.dow ,mee. of land bll elM. and "'vel of TDS, Yuma VaUell area.
<br />
<br /> 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
<br /> mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/I mg/l mg/l
<br /> (Dollars) (Dollars) (Dollars) (Dollars) (Dollars) (Dollars)
<br /> Land I 171.5 171.5 171.5 171.5 190.4 323.2
<br /> Land 2 171.5 171.5 171.5 171.5 190.4 323.2
<br /> Land 3 171.5 171.5 171.5 171.5 189.6 322.5
<br />l'\:) Double Crop I 171.5 171.5 171.5 171.5 190.4 323.2
<br />00 Double Crop 2 171.5 170.6 170.6 170.6 188.9 321.8
<br />....:l Double Crop \ 145.1 113.9 1102 93.8 93.3 162.4
<br />.~*
<br /> Tab'" 8.78. Ratio of amount of water ""ed to land Thb'" 8.80. Accumulated damage totals of ob.erved
<br /> and profit aU bll "'vel of TDS, Yuma data and predicted value. bll "'vel of
<br /> VaUell area. TDS, Yuma VaUell area.
<br /> TDS Acre Feet Ratio of Net TDS Observed PredIcted
<br /> (mg/!) Acre Feet Per Acre Dollar Return (mg/I) (Dollars) (Dollars)
<br /> Per Acre Foot
<br /> 800 4,737
<br /> 900 223,658 3.858 65.16 900 9,595
<br /> 1000 223,535 3.856 65.07 1000 28,253 19,434
<br /> 1100 223,521 3.856 65.06 1100 31,622 39,366
<br /> 1200 223,456 3.854 65.01 1200 46,152 79,738
<br /> 1300 222,483 3.838 6451 1300 208,241 161,515
<br /> 1400 221,504 3.821 64.10 1400 375,417 327,160
<br />
<br />presented in Table 8-79. The overall decreaae in
<br />profits for the interval 900 to 1400 mg/l TDS la of the
<br />magnitude of $875,000. Objective function values are
<br />plotted in Figure 8. 17 which illustrates a trend of
<br />declining values in net profits. Table 8.80 accumulates
<br />the differences between the objective functions for the
<br />various TOS levels. In Figure 8-18, a function of the
<br />order Y = be"'" Is fitted to these points where b =
<br />16.7145, e = 2.718281828, m = 0.Q07059, and x = any
<br />level of TDS. Thla function waa used to derive the
<br />predicted values also contained in Table 8-80. As can
<br />be noted from hhe table, a larger amount of variation la
<br />present aa R waa equal to 0.90. However, the
<br />functional fit la sufficient to estimate further monetary
<br />damages incurred hy farmers in thla area aa the
<br />amount of TDS increases.
<br />
<br />Table 8-81 summarizes some of the model
<br />rmdings. Annual total damages are expected to be
<br />$875,417. Average annual per acre damages are
<br />estimated to be $6.48. For an increment of 1 mgl1
<br />TDS, incurred losses are placed at $750.88. Analiza.
<br />
<br />Tab'" 8.79. Total and per acre net profit bll TDS
<br />"'ve4 Yuma VaUell area.
<br />
<br />TDS Profit Per Acre
<br />(mg/!) (Dollars) (Dollars)
<br />900 14,573,704 251.39
<br />1000 14,545,451 250.90
<br />1100 14,542,082 250.84
<br />1200 14,527,552 250.59
<br />1300 14,365,462 241.80
<br />1400 14,198,286 244.91
<br />
<br />Tab'" 8.81. Summaf'l/ statistic., Yuma VaUell area.
<br />
<br />Total Acres
<br />Double Cropped Acres
<br />Annual Total Damages
<br />Annual Per Acre Damages
<br />Annual Damage.~ Per mg!I
<br />Annual Damages Per mg/l Per Acre
<br />
<br />57,973
<br />5,368
<br />$375,417
<br />$ 6.48
<br />$ 750.83
<br />$0.01295
<br />
<br />tion of the two latter estimates, predicts that a cost of
<br />$0.01295 per mgl1 per acre will be incurred for a 1
<br />mgl1 TOS increaae at the diversion point to the area.
<br />
<br />CENTRAL ARIZONAPROJECrBERVlCE AREA
<br />
<br />The Bureau of Reclamation awarded the first
<br />construction contract of the Central Arizona Project in
<br />April of 1978. Groundbreaking ceremonies were held
<br />on the shores of Lake Havasu on May 6, 1978, and It la
<br />anticipated that water will be flowing through the
<br />Granite Reef Aqueduct by 1987. In view of this fact,
<br />the Arizona Water Commission haa less than 5 more
<br />years to complete the taak of allocating Central
<br />Arizona Project water to the many potential users.
<br />They have "expressions of interest" from approxi-
<br />mately one hundred sources. These include between
<br />16 and 20 old, established irrigation and drainage
<br />districts; newly formed districts; utillty companies;
<br />mining companies; water companies; municipalities;
<br />military posts; ranches; individuals; and others. It is
<br />obvious that any sort of equitable distribution will be
<br />extremely difficult.
<br />
<br />In the course of negotiations which finally
<br />resulted in authorization of the Central Arizona
<br />
<br />
<br />176
<br />
|