WSP07975

• File Number: 8278.100
• Description: Title I - Yuma Desalting Plant
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Date: 10/1/1987
• Author: USDOI/BOR
• Title: Yuma Desalting Plant Operations Study - Draft Special Report
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

I

I

plan 8-6.
Control).
Cost $21. 0

Imolement Veaetation Manaaement (Phreatoohvte
(50-percent management.)
million, TVS 930 points, Category III.

I

By replacing low-habitat value, high-water use vegetation along
the Colorado River with higher-habitat value, lower-water use
vegetation, additional water could be made available for other
uses. Managing about 50 percent of the vegetation area would
yield about 80,000 acre-feet per year.

I

I

Advantages:
'Could enhance the riparian habitat.
"Increases total water supply in the Colorado River Basin.
"Increases the frequency of excess flow in the river.

I

I

Disadvantages:
'States claim title

to water conserved.

Plan B-6A Imolement
management. )
Cost $14.6 million,

Veaetation Manaaement.

(7S-percent

I

TVS 928 points, Category II.

I

If about 75 percent -of the vegetation could be managed, yields
would be sufficient to the eliminate the YDP production.

I

Advantages:
.Same as 8-6, but conserves more water.

Disadvantages:
.Same as 8-6.

I

Plan B-7. Imorove
Cost $29.1 million,

Irriaation Svstems - Arizona.
TVS 1047 points, Category III.

I

Irrigation distribution systems in the Yuma Mesa/Yuma Valley area
would be lined reducing seepage by about 20,000 acre-feet per
year. About 1/2 of that amount returns to the Colorado River as
return flow. Thus, at most, about ~O,OOO acre-feet are available
as substitute water from the Yuma area.

I

I

Advantages:
"Improves irrigation efficiency making conserved water available
for other uses (possibly to deliver to Mexico until Arizona
develops alternate uses).

I

Disadvantages:
"Requires water right from Arizona.
"This is a partial solution - must be used in conjunction with
other plans.

I

23