WSP08835

• File Number: 8149.100
• Description: Miscellaneous Small Projects and Project Studies - NRCS-Ft Lyon Canal Co Limestone Graveyard Creeks
• State: CO
• Basin: Arkansas
• Water Division: 2
• Date: 6/2/1993
• Author: Gronning Engineering
• Title: Ft Lyon Canal Company Water Transfer Alternatives Study Phase I Report
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

0078

Table 2.1
Historical Water Transfers

Year

($/ acre foot C. U.)

Lower Arkansas Water Rights:
1. West Pueblo Ditch
2. Las Animas Consolidated Canal
3. Colorado Canal Companies
4. Rocky Ford Ditch
Upper Arkansas Water Rights:
1. Twin Lakes
2. Busk Ivanhoe

1978-1992
1985
1986-1987
1988

$732 to $892
$2,000
$1,570 to $2,500
$3,152

1970-1992
1986-1987

$3,182 to $9,091
$3,000

Factors Contributinl[ to Water Sales

The gradual movement of water from rural/agricultural areas to urban/municipal and industrial
areas results from several general factors, most of which are not unique to southeastern Colorado.

1. Water is a property right and is severable from the land.

2. Farming is always hard work, fraught with high risk of financial failure or small
return on investment.

3. Farming income is sometimes less than the return on investment of water sale
proceeds.

4. Agricultural incomes are not growing, especially among family farmers. (Keene-
Osborn, 1992)

5. Some farmers are failing and need or want to sell.

6. Agricultural capital availability is limited.

7. Urban populations are growing while rural, agricultural communities are not
growing or are declining in population.

8. Municipal and industrial users wish to obtain firm water supplies for drought years.

9. Farming accounts for most of the water consumption in the state, but accounts for
only a part of the population, political base and economy of the whole state.

10. There are insufficient young farmers interested in taking over farms; and, the major
capital investment required disqualifies many potential entrants.

2-13