Laserfiche WebLink
J <br /> <br /> <br />12/20/79 Memo, p. 5, #3, (Alluvial Valley Floors) <br />"3. What criteria were used to distinguish between <br />colluvial and alluvial deposits? Provide the data and <br />assumptions upon which this determination was based." <br />As presented in the meeting of January 7, 1980, <br />the colluvial, alluvial and terrace deposits shown <br />on revised Map 6 were mapped using aerial photo- <br />graphic, topographic and ground reconnaisance data <br />collected by a private consultant working for EFC, and <br />then field-checked by EFC personnel during the <br />reconnaisance investigation required by 30 CFR <br />785.19(c). The methodology used in the investigation <br />is more fully described in the revised text of <br />Section 785.19(c), pp. 785-9(a)-(n). <br />12/20/79 Memo, o. 5, (k4, (Alluvial Vallev Floors <br />"4. The applicant has not demonstrated a lack of water <br />for flood irrigation. The 2.0 acre-f t. criteria in the <br />OSM technical guidence paper is 2.0 acre-ft/acre of <br />irrigable land not 2.0 acre-ft/acre of watershed as <br />calculated by the applicant. The applicant should determine <br />runoff during the growing season and estimate how many <br />acres could be irrigated." <br />See p. 785-15a, where this calculation was revised. <br />The revised calculation was performed as prescribed by <br />OSM Technical Guideline. See also, pp. 785-9(a)- <br />(n). - <br />12/20/79 Memo, p. 6, #5 (Alluvial Valley Floors) <br />"5. The subirrigation discussion on pages 785-11, 12 should <br />be examined more closely. See what comments you can get <br />from Dave Holm or Stan Zawistowski." <br />No MLR comments on the subirrigation discussion have <br />been received to 1/14/80. The text in Section 785.19(c) <br />has been revised to more fully discuss subirrigation <br />in the study area. <br />