Chapter II
	Proposed Action and Alternatives
	This chapter describes the alternatives which were analyzed, discusses an alternative considered but eliminated, and provides a tabular comparison of environmental impacts of the alternatives.

Introduction

The range of alternatives developed for this environmental assessment (EA) was formulated using information gathered at public scoping meetings and technical meetings with irrigation districts and from Federal and State agencies. The alternatives were shaped and constrained in part by legal mandates, existing agreements, and physical or economic limitations. Action alternatives described in the EA aimed at meeting water supply and other obligations to the irrigation districts, while at the same time providing opportunities for environmental and resource benefits in the Solomon River Basin (Basin).

A summary of key impacts of the alternatives is presented in table II-1 at the end of this chapter.

Elements Common to All Alternatives

Common elements to the No Action and action alternatives are: (1) an adaptive management process for addressing potential selenium-related issues associated with federally developed irrigation facilities in the Basin, (2) conversion of contracts, and (3) proposed conservation measures for the protection of the interior least tern.

Adaptive Management Process and Selenium Concentrations

The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) initiated a water quality sampling program in 1998 to assess the presence or absence of organic and inorganic compounds on selected sites within the study area. This investigation was conducted in part under Public Law 99-294 of 1986, which requires an investigation of soil characteristics that might result in toxic or hazardous irrigation return flows. One objective of this program was to determine potential environmental effects as a result of elevated selenium levels. Data results from water, sediment, and biota were used in an aquatic hazard assessment of releases in terms of the potential for food chain bioaccumulation and reproductive impairment in fish.

Adaptive management involves decisionmaking that takes into account the uncertainties

and gaps in information often associated with managing natural resources. One of the uncertainties encountered in the Solomon River Basin is the potential impact of selenium concentrations on biological resources. Adaptive management (including studies to determine whether selenium concentrations affect biological resources) is an element applied to all the alternatives.

Selenium is a naturally occurring trace element common in marine shales such as those underlying geologic formations within the Basin. Past irrigation practices (project and non-project) may have resulted in artificially increasing the amount of selenium that would have occurred under natural weathering conditions. Although humans and animals require selenium in small quantities for good health, at higher concentrations selenium can cause birth defects, reproductive failure, and death in fish, wildlife, and livestock.

Selenium Levels

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established a water quality criterion of 5 micrograms per liter (µ/L) to protect freshwater aquatic life from chronic levels of selenium. This means selenium concentrations at or below 5 µg/L are not considered harmful, but higher levels of selenium are a concern because selenium can be bio-accumulated (i.e., taken up by an organism from water or through food) and biomagnified. Biomagnification is the process by which the concentration of a constituent, such as selenium, increases as higher levels of the aquatic food chain feed on organisms that have bioaccumulated selenium.

Concentrations of selenium were elevated above EPA criteria in some samples taken from the reservoirs, river, surface drains, wetlands, sediment, and biota in the Basin. Selenium concentrations in some of the samples were elevated at levels which raise concern about bioaccumulation in fish and wildlife. While there have been no official Basin-wide selenium studies conducted to date, Fish and Wildlife Service personnel have not documented any adverse effects on the biological resources at Kirwin National Wildlife Refuge.

Further Study

Reclamation is continuing to work with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to develop a 2-year selenium study to determine if (1) published biological effects threshold of selenium as related to reproductive failure are being incorrectly applied to flowing river systems and (2) what is the true impact on fish and wildlife resources of selenium in heavily irrigated systems. The data collected can be used to determine if selenium is causing population-level impacts in fish and birds. If such impacts are occurring, then the data can be used to make science-based management decisions concerning water distribution, water use, and other agricultural practices.

Depending on the study results of the upcoming Republican River adaptive management investigation, determinations will be made to either (1) extrapolate conclusions of selenium impacts to fish populations to the Solomon Basin or (2) initiate an assessment specific to the Solomon Basin as described below.

This project is designed to determine the actual impacts of selenium on fish populations in the Solomon River Basin. The project duration will be 2 years and will include: (1) a literature survey of selenium in aquatic ecosystems; (2) a selenium residue survey to determine the environmental distributions of selenium in water, emergent insects, and fish; (3) an assessment of fish population structures using bluegill as a fish model to determine if differences occur in various demographic parameters; and (4) controlled laboratory studies using reproductively active adult bluegill to determine actual reproductive impairment or success. This information could significantly alter approaches taken by Reclamation in water management, as well as selenium monitoring, control, and remediation in the Basin and other aquatic systems potentially affected by selenium.

Conversion of Contracts

The current contracts that provide water service to the Basin irrigation districts were entered into under the authority of section 9(e) of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 (1939 Act). Water service contracts entered into under 9(e) of the 1939 Act are limited by law to a term not longer than 40 years. In 1956, the 1939 Act was supplemented by the Administration of Contracts Under Section 9, Reclamation Project Act of 1939 (1956 Act). The 1956 Act provides, among other things, for the conversion of water service contracts entered into under section 9(e) of the 1939 Act to repayment contracts under section 9(d) of the 1939 Act.

The Kirwin and Webster Irrigation Districts (Districts) have requested that their 9(e) water service contracts be converted to 9(d) repayment contracts pursuant to the 1956 Act. It is proposed that the repayment contracts will have a repayment period of 40 years. Irrigation districts are required to repay their negotiated portion of the irrigation obligation within the repayment period of the repayment contract. In situations where irrigation districts' negotiated obligation is not sufficient to repay the entire irrigation obligation within the repayment period, "aid to irrigation" (i.e., power revenues) will pay the balance.

Proposed Conservation Measures for the Protection of the Interior Least Tern

The conservation measures outlined in the Biological Assessment include: (1) restriction of vehicular access along the upstream face of Kirwin Dam and (2) installation of interpretive signs along the stone barrier and at other suitable locations on or near Kirwin Dam to educate visitors about the potential presence of nesting terns and the effects of human disturbance. These measures will eliminate unauthorized vehicle access in this area when nesting terns are present. Once nesting and fledging activities have been completed, vehicles will be permitted into the area for fishing.

Alternatives

No Action Alternative (Full Irrigation)

The No Action Alternative represents the renewal of the existing water supply contracts for the Districts with no change in the current and projected future operation of reservoirs in the Basin.

The No Action Alternative would provide for:

(1) A base water supply of 12 inches for irrigators in the Districts, with a provision to purchase additional water if available. The water supply (acre-feet) to irrigators in the districts is:⁽¹⁾ Kirwin 5,580 and Webster 4,603. Annual average irrigation shortages (percentages) for the districts are: Kirwin 61.8 and Webster 59.7.

(2) There are no minimum pool elevations at Kirwin and Webster Reservoirs.

(3) No minimum desirable streamflow (MDS) releases from Waconda Lake.

(4) Continue to implement water conservation practices currently described in each districts' water conservation plans. In January 1999, the Districts updated their water conservation plans to include the following: (1) improve flow and delivery efficiencies through weed control and reshaping and compacting the bottoms of canals and laterals, (2) change cropping patterns to crops with low water requirements, and (3) funding for improvements concerning flow and efficiencies (cost-share programs).

(5) Reduced inflows - Recent Reclamation hydrology studies show that water supplies for the Districts are significantly reduced from the levels predicted in the Definite Plan Report (DPR).

The 10-year average inflow into Kirwin Reservoir has fallen from 80,400 acre-feet per year in 1955 to 48,800 acre-feet per year in 1970, and to 14,500 acre-feet per year in 1990. The 1981-90 average inflow of 14,500 acre-feet per year was only 31 percent of the anticipated DPR inflow of 47,400 acre-feet per year. The reduced inflows resulted in no project water being available to the district in 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1991, and 1992. Higher inflows since 1993 have brought the reservoir back to the conservation level and resulted in a 10-year average inflow of 46,400 acre-feet per year in 1999, but these higher inflows are not expected to continue.

The 10-year average inflow into Webster Reservoir has fallen from 74,500 acre-feet per year in 1960 (about the time of completion of the dam) to 44,200 acre-feet per year in 1970, to 21,100 acre-feet per year in 1980, and to 12,300 acre-feet per year in 1990. The 1983-92 average inflow of 11,700 acre-feet per year was only 23 percent of the anticipated DPR inflows of 51,700 acre-feet per year. The reduced inflows have resulted in no project water being available to the district in the years 1972, 1978, 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, and 1992. Higher inflows since 1993 have brought the reservoir back to the conservation level and resulted in 10-year average inflows of 55,700 acre-feet per year in 1999, but these higher inflows are not expected to continue.

The No Action Alternative would result in average annual irrigation shortages of 62 percent for the Kirwin Irrigation District and 60 percent for the Webster Irrigation District. The reduced flows also adversely impact wetlands, waterfowl, fisheries, water-based recreation, and aquatic organisms, with higher potential for fish kills within the reservoirs and in the streams below the reservoirs.

Irrigation Alternative

This alternative would continue the use of storing water in Kirwin and Webster Reservoirs for irrigation use. There would be no minimum pools for fisheries and/or recreation.

The Irrigation Alternative would also provide for:

(1) A maximum annual delivery of 12 inches for irrigators in both districts with no provisions to purchase additional water. The water supply (acre-feet) to irrigators in the following districts is: Kirwin 6,583 and Webster 5,085. Annual average irrigation shortages (percentages) for the districts are: Kirwin 60 and Webster 60.

(2) There would be no minimum pools for fisheries and/or recreation.

(3) No MDS releases from Waconda Lake.

(4) Irrigation districts agree to continue existing conservation measures outlined in the No Action Alternative. In addition, the districts also agree to implement further improvements including: (1) the creation of a conservation fund and the expansion of water conservation policies and practices, (2) education of irrigators and ditch riders through educational workshops and programs, and (3) structural improve-ments, operational measures, and on-farm efficiency improvements. Assuming a reasonable level of implementation of the policies and practices, it is expected that overall system efficiency would be improved by approximately 6 percent for Kirwin Irrigation District and 9 percent for Webster Irrigation District, while on-farm system efficiency would be improved by 5 percent for both irrigation districts.

(5) Reduced inflows - The average annual volume shortage (acre-feet) for each district would be: Kirwin 19,400 and Webster 15,700. Because the irrigation districts hold all the rights to water in the reservoirs, conserved water would be used to reduce existing irrigation shortages.

Fish, Wildlife, and Recreation Alternative (FWR Alternative)

This alternative would provide for a State-recommended minimum pool elevation of 1872.0 feet at Webster Reservoir and a Federal-recommended minimum pool elevation of 1704.0 feet at Kirwin Reservoir. Maintaining water surface elevation levels high enough to allow access to at least one boat ramp through August 31 would provide boating/recreation access at both reservoirs. Higher elevations would also benefit the fishery and reservoir riparian vegetation. Water would be released from Waconda Lake for MDS.

The FWR Alternative would also provide for the following:

(1) The water supply (acre-feet) to irrigators in the Districts would be: Kirwin 5,779 and Webster 3,806. The annual average irrigation shortages (percentages) for each district are: Kirwin 64 and Webster 68.

(2) Minimum reservoir pool elevations (feet) of 1704 at Kirwin and 1872 at Webster; elevations at least 2 feet higher than the bottom of the lowest boat ramp would be maintained for guaranteed access to at least one ramp.

(3) Water would be released from Waconda Lake to maintain MDS. MDS are meant to preserve, maintain, or enhance base flows of instream water uses as they relate to water quality, fish, wildlife, aquatic life, recreation, general aesthetics, and cosmetic uses. Additionally, MDS provide for the protection of existing water rights (K.S.A. 1987 Supp. 82a-928 (I)). The Kansas Water Office has recommended the following MDS in cubic feet per second for the Solomon River as measured at Niles, Kansas:

(4) The Districts would continue to implement conservation measures outlined in their 1999 Water Conservation Plans. In addition, the Districts would implement other water conservation measures if the agricultural and surface water supplies stabilized. Among these measures would be more extensive conversion of surface laterals to buried pipe, structural and nonstructural improvements in on-farm irrigation, and remote monitoring of wasteways and farm turnouts.

(5) Reduced inflows - The average annual volume shortage (acre-feet) for each District would be: Kirwin 20,700 and Webster 17,800. Because the Districts hold all the rights to water in the reservoirs, conserved water would be used to reduce existing irrigation shortages.

Negotiated Alternative (Preferred Alternative)

This alternative combines elements of both the Irrigation and the FWR Alternatives. The Negotiated Alternative would maintain capacity for irrigation storage in Kirwin and Webster Reservoirs, while establishing minimum pool elevations for greater recreation and boating access and to improve reservoir conditions for fisheries and riparian vegetation. This alternative was developed through negotiation between Reclamation and the affected irrigation districts.

The Negotiated Alternative also provides for:

(1) Due to a limited water supply, the Districts are willing to limit irrigation deliveries to maintain higher reservoir levels to benefit fish, wildlife, and recreation. Each District will determine the amount of irrigation water released during any one irrigation season. The amount of storage water released during any one irrigation season shall be based on District policy and restricted to no more than the waters available above the established reservoir shutoff elevation. The average annual irrigation shortages (percentages) for each District will be Kirwin 57 and Webster 55.

(2) Minimum reservoir pool elevations (feet) of 1700 at Kirwin and 1863 at Webster. These elevations are 3 feet higher than the top of inactive pool elevations at each reservoir and are believed to be sufficient to provide significant recreation, fisheries, and other benefits, particularly during late summer and fall and during extended periods of drought.⁽²⁾

(3) No MDS releases from Waconda Lake.

(4) The districts agree to implement water conservation measures beyond those currently in use. The districts agree to continue to use existing conservation methods and to implement additional improvements to reduce existing shortages as outlined below.

The districts agree to:

Establish a revolving water conservation fund to be used for annual costs associated with the water conservation program activities.

• As permitted by Reclamation's Contracting Officer, continue the practice of seasoning canals with streamflows or flood waters to reduce canal losses and control the growth of vegetation.
• Continue the established practice of providing assistance to irrigators who upgrade on-farm irrigation facilities by improving turnout locations, installing meters, assisting with buried pipe projects to allow the use of gated pipe or center pivots, and implementation of other new technology.
• Continue to work with Reclamation on evaluation and implementation of computer software and other new technology to improve water scheduling and accounting.
• Continue and/or improve existing policies and practices that further the goals of water conservation; provide educational opportunities for district employees, such as canal operations training, water use seminars, and others; and work with irrigators to improve on-farm efficiencies.
• Provide for proper accounting for all water deliveries and operational waste within 5 years. It is the general goal of the districts to increase the delivery efficiency of the district by a total of 6 percent at Kirwin, 9 percent at Webster, and on-farm efficiencies by a total of 5 percent.

  (5) Reduced inflows - The average annual volume shortage (acre-feet) for each District would be: Kirwin 18,500 and Webster 14,500. Because the Districts hold all the rights to water in the reservoirs, conserved water would be used to reduce existing irrigation shortages.

  (6) Other features or results of this alternative: The Negotiated Alternative provides for the inclusion of specific environmental measures in the districts' operating plans. Each district would:

  • Install or create better screening devices to prevent the passage of fish, crayfish, and others into turnouts and lateral systems.
  • Establish policies to maintain reservoir levels.
  • Provide the United States, before July 1 of each year, an annual report of environmental activities/accomplishments for the prior year.
  • Cooperate with Reclamation and others in improving fish and wildlife habitat and recreational access. If requested, the district shall annually furnish labor for work coordinated through Reclamation during the fall of the year. In lieu of labor, the district may furnish a district-owned machine and operator.
  • The district agrees to cooperate with the United States, if requested, in the implementation of an adaptive management plan for selenium.

Alternative Considered and Eliminated from Detailed Analysis

During the NEPA process and preparation of the EA, a No Contract Renewal Alternative was considered and eliminated from detailed analysis. Following is a brief description of the No Contract Renewal Alternative and the reasons it was excluded from detailed consideration.

No Contract Renewal Alternative

This alternative would not renew the existing water service contracts with the Districts.

If this alternative were implemented, the districts could not use their existing distribution systems or store water in the reservoirs for irrigation use. After 5 years of nonuse, each district's water right to divert and store water could be canceled. The cancellation of these water rights would provide various options for use of the reservoirs. However, if the storage and use of the water is changed to any purpose that was not contained in the authorizing legislation, it would require a reauthorization by the U.S. Congress.

The No Contract Renewal Alternative was excluded from consideration for the following reasons: (1) the Solomon River Basin Irrigation Districts have a right-to-renew clause in their existing contracts; (2) Reclamation is required by the Reclamation Act of 1956 to provide irrigation districts holding such contracts a first right to a share of the projects' available water supply; (3) Reclamation does not hold any water rights at Kirwin and Webster Reservoirs--the water rights are held in the name of the irrigation districts; and (4) this alternative does not meet the "purpose and need" to renew the contracts as outlined in the EA.

1. Amount of water delivered to farm headgate.

2. These minimum elevations are lower than the State-recommended minimum elevation at Webster Reservoir of 1872 feet and the federally recommended minimum at Kirwin Reservoir of 1704 feet.