Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-8- <br /> <br />According to information received, it appears that the construction work, <br />now underway on the Fire Mountain Canal, will be completed early this fall and <br />that there will be a substantial balance, approximately ~600,000, of money ap- <br />propriated for this project, remaining unexpended. This money could be used to <br />start construction of other features, such as the reservoir, of the Paonia <br />Project, provided reauthorization is secured in the present session of Congress. <br />If such reauthorization is not obtained at this time, construction would have to <br />cease until reauthorization takes place during the next session of Congress. <br />It has been suggested that reauthorization may be obtained early in the next <br />session in time to obtain additional appropriations of money for fiscal 1952, <br />but in that event there would be a cessation of construction activities pending <br />reauthorization. <br /> <br />8a. Transmission Lines in Vicinity of Estes Park. The citizens of <br />Estes Park, acting through their Chamber of Commerce and other groups, protested <br />the overhead power transmission lines on the Colorado-Big Thompson Project in <br />the vicinity of Estes Park. Such protests were made to the Bureau of Reclama- <br />tion and communicated to Colorado Senators and Congressmen. As a result of such <br />protests, a hearing was held by the Bureau of Reclamation of Estes Park on the <br />20th day of April 1950. The Director participated in this hearing. <br /> <br />Among other things, the Estes Park citizens urged that overhead trans- <br />mission lines were unsightly, destroyed the scenic beauty and tended to destroy <br />recreational advantages in the area. They also contended that such lines are a <br />threat to life and property. They requested that the plans for such transmission <br />lines be changed so as to place the lines underground. <br /> <br />The Bureau of Reclamation investigated the costs of such a change and <br />found that it would involve an additional cost of approxim'ltely .Ji;800,ooO, In <br />addition, it was explained by the Bureau that such change would necessitate can- <br />cellation of contracts with contractors who are now engaged in constructing the <br />lines, Such a cancellation would involve further costs. <br /> <br />At the hearing held in Estes Park, the Northern Colorado Water Conser- <br />vancy District, the State R.E.A. Organization and a number of R.E.A. Cooperatives <br />which will be served with power from the Colorado-Big Thompson Project, opposed <br />the request of the Estes Park people. It was pointed out by them that an in- <br />creased cost which might reach one million dollars would place an unnecessary <br />and increased burden on the water and power users under the project. It was also <br />explained that the authorization by Congress of the construction of the lines, <br />in the absence of specific legislative language to the contrary, involved con- <br />struction in accordance with the usual and customary manner; and that there is <br />no legislative authori ty to bury these lines, with the addi tionp,l expense in- <br />volved, and change the cost thereof as a nonreimbursable in the interest of',_ <br />recreational values. <br /> <br />The testimony submitted at this hearing, both for and against the pro- <br />posed change in construction, was reduced to 1~iting and is being considered by <br />the Bureau of Reclamation. No decision has been made to date, but the construc- <br />tion of the overhead lines under existing contracts is proceeding. <br /> <br />If any member of the Board desires to read the record of the.~he.arin"', ~ <br />i'. TC'0U <br />this matter, it is available in the office of the Board. ~. ,.t.. <br />