Laserfiche WebLink
<br />RECOMMENDED PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM <br /> <br />Alternative 2 is the <br />plan is briefly described <br /> <br />11 <br />recommended plan for implementation7 This <br />in the ALTERNATIVE PLANS section of this report. <br /> <br />Public Recommendations <br /> <br />The program implementation area is within the Clark County Conservat- <br />ion District, Nevada, and the Littlefield~Hurricane Valley Natural <br />Resources Conservation District, Arizona. The districts have taken <br />an active role in conservation planning. Close liaison with private <br />landusers and local government entities has been maintained to recognize <br />local needs and desires, The SCS field office at Las Vegas, Nevada <br />has disseminated information to increase public awareness about the <br />study objectives and goals. Needed improvements were reviewed with <br />board members of the irrigation entities and groups and were found to be <br />acceptable. Site specific details will be clarified and final selection <br />of improvements will be made during implementation. <br /> <br />Basis for Selection of Recommended Plan <br /> <br />Onfarm irrigation system and water management improvements are <br />influenced by what is physically possible, economically feasible, and <br />acceptable to the farmer. Alternative plan elements and effects were <br />jointly determined and evaluated in both physical and economic terms <br />by the irrigation specialist, design engineer, biologist, geologist, <br />economist, range conservationist, soil scientist, resource conserva- <br />tionist and district conservationist. <br /> <br />The Physical analysis involved an inventory and evaluation of <br />irrigation systems (and irrigation water management levels). Irrigation <br />systems and management were analyzed to determine the physical effects <br />on both water conservation and salt load reduction,. Improvement oppor- <br />tunities were identified for agronomic and cultural practices for each <br />crop which influenced irrigation efficiency and water requirements. <br />An environmental assessment was made to identify significant wildlife <br />and other biotic resources. <br /> <br />The Economic analysis was directly linked to studies by other <br />disciplines and is sensitive to the varying levels of resource development <br />in both alternatives. Each practice or group of practices was analyzed <br />to determine its contribution in both physical and economic terms. <br />An analysis was made of the social impacts of alternatives, Average <br />annual incremental costs of alternatives were compared to average annual <br />incremental benefits, Incremental benefits exceed incremental costs for <br />components of irrigation systems and management improvements, <br /> <br />11 Salinity benefits occur downstream of the program area, and onfarm <br />benefits occur within the program area, <br /> <br />51 <br /> <br />,...., ,'OJ'' ,. 1 'J <br />c. ..' '.,:-..J ,. <br />