Laserfiche WebLink
<br />--------- <br />. <br /> <br />- <br />. <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />- - <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />- - -- <br />. <br /> <br />TABLE 1.1 <br />GREAT PLAINS RESERVOIRS SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES <br /> <br /> (af/yr unless noted) <br /> Kansas <br /> Transit Decrease In Water Net Impact <br /> Reservoir Water Supplv Loss Estimated Agricultural Supply on <br /> Ft. Lyon G, Plains Water Return Flow Acreage Costs3) Output4) <br />Alternative Headaate Reservoir1) fu!Jm!y Reaulrement2) (ac) (million $) (million $) <br /> Historic (pre-compact 49,800 31,800 0 0 0 N/A N/A <br /> year 1977) <br />1 Queens (Level). Nee Gronda, 40,100 25,600 7,500 o to 6,300 to 3.8to 1,80 to <br /> Nee No She, and occasional 2,500 8,500 14.6 0,95 <br /> Nee So Pah <br />2 Queens,'Nee Granda (Level). 40,100 25,600 7,500 o to 6,100 to 3,7to 1,90 to <br /> Nee No She, and occasional 2,500 8,200 14,6 0,85 <br /> Nee So Pah <br />3 Queens (Level) and Nee Gronda 30,100 19,200 9,900 Oto 3,000 to 1,8to 3,50 to <br /> 0 3,000 11.9 3,50 <br />4 Queens, Nee No She, and 40,100 25,600 7,500 Oto o to 3.4 to 0.9 to <br /> occasional Nee So Pah and 0 0 11,9 0.9 <br /> Nee Gronda <br />5 Queens and Nee Gronda (Level) 28,100 17,900 1 0,400 Oto 2,500 to 1.5 to 3.75 to <br /> 0 2,500 11.9 3.75 <br /> <br />Note: 1) Amount of water diverted at the Ft. Lyon headgate delivered to the Great Plains Reservoirs, <br />2) Estimated amount of water required to prevent injury to other water rights. <br />3) Estimated cost of water rights acquis~ion inciudes 20 percent for contingencies. The low value reflects the cost of the change in beneficial <br />consumption use of the Great Plains decree from existing cond~ions. The high value reflects the cost of the entire beneflcial consumptive use of <br />the Great Plains decree under existing cond~ions plus the estimated return flow requirement. ' <br />4) Net annual impact on regional economy assumes historic recreational potential for a~ernative 4 and equal recreational potential for a~ernatives 1, <br />2,3 and 5, See Chapter 8,0 and Figure 7.1 for more details on the economic benefits and operationai features of each alternative, <br /> <br />Reproduced from Engineering Hydrology Study of the Great Plains Reservoirs <br />Boyle Engineering <br />January, 1993 <br /> <br />l\:) <br />00 <br />o <br />w <br />