Laserfiche WebLink
<br />• <br /> <br />The water quality of the three monitoring wells is quite <br />variable, as shown in Table 2. The ground water in the monitoring <br />well MW-1 is relatively highly mineralized (total dissolved <br />solids = 585 mg/1) and is of a calcium, sulfate, bicarbonate <br />type. The ground water in the monitoring well MW-2 is the least <br />mineralized of the three wells and has a conductivity .of 232 <br />umhos. The ground water in the well MW-3 is of a calcium, <br />magnesium, bicarbonate type and has a TDS-content of 326 mg/1. <br />The high variability of the water quality in these three wells is <br />possibly explainable by the different nature of recharge sources. <br />The wells MW-1 and MW-3 are located within the flood irrigated <br />orchards and, therefore, are more affected by active leaching of <br />the irrigation return flow. The well MW-2, located within the <br />loadout facility and topographically above the flood irrigated <br />areas, is evidently more affected by the infiltration from the <br />surface and irrigation ditches. <br />The ground water quality in wells MW-1 and 3, illustrated <br />in a radial diagram, is shown in Plate 4. <br />3.2.4 CONCLUSIONS <br />The ground water regime and water quality within the study <br />area are highly affected by the intensive flood irrigation and <br />the existence of several irrigation ditches. Due to this impact <br />the ground water table is substantially higher during most of the <br />year than it would be under natural conditions. Although long- <br />term ground water level monitoring data are not available at this <br />time, it is possible to assume that only the lowest part of the <br />valley of the North Fork Gunnison River could be naturally <br />subirrigated. <br />11 <br />GEO-H1DR0 CONSULTING, INC. <br />