My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP10089
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
10001-10999
>
WSP10089
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:57:14 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:06:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.200.05.A
Description
Hoover Dam/Lake Mead/Boulder Canyon Project
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
1/1/1950
Title
The Story of Hoover Dam: Conservation Bulletin No. 9
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Uncontrolled and unregulated the Colorado had little value. The yearly <br />spring run.off followed by rainless months made any large irrigation or power <br />development uncertain and unprofitable without control measures. Nor, <br />was the undependable silt-laden flow of the river suitable for city water <br />supplies. Also, further development in the area was infeasible; for already <br />more land had been reclaimed for irrigation than could be sustained by <br />depending on the natural flow of the river. <br />Dammed and under control all of these problems would be alleviated. <br />And there were many possible damsites along the course of the Colorado. <br />Thc area tributary to the Colorado is, by nature, roughly divided into an <br />upper and a lower basin. The dividing line falls at Lee Ferry, Arizona, a <br />few miles south of the Arizona.Utah boundary. <br />As defined in the Colorado River Compact, the upper basin includes those <br />parts of the States of Arizona, Colorado, Nev..- Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming <br />within and from which waters naturally drain into the Colorado River system <br />above Lee Ferry, and also all purts of those States located without the drainage <br />area of the Colorado River system which are novo{ or shall hereafter be bene- <br />ficially served by waters diverted from the system above Lee Ferry; and the <br />lower basin includes those parts of the States of Arizona, California, Nevada, <br />New Mexico, and Utah within and from which waters naturally drain into <br />the Colorado River system below Lee Ferry, and also all parts of those States <br />located without the drainage area of the Colorado River system which are <br />now or shall hereafter be beneficially served by waters diverted from the <br />system below Lee Ferry. <br />The two basins are about equal in area and are separated by the "canyon <br />region"-a 400.mile bottleneck through which the Colorado has battered its <br />way for countless eons of time. The gorges begin at Lee Ferry and end <br />with Black Canyon. <br />A comprehensive plan of development required detailed data from hath <br />npper and lower basins. Bureau of Reclamation engineers investigated a <br />total of 70 dam and reservoir sites along the entire course of the river. <br />The most suitable sites in the upper basin were: the Flaming Gorge site <br />on the Green River in northern Utah, with a potential reservoir capacity of <br />4,000,000 acre.feet; the Juniper site on the Yampa River in Colorado, with <br />1,500,000 acre-feet; and Dewey site on the Colorado in eastern Utah, with <br />2,370,000 acre.feet. <br />All of the above sites were objectionable for several reasons. In the first <br />place, neither site offered sufficient storage capacity for adequate.river regula- <br />tion. Another disadvantage was the distance from where regulation was <br />most needed. Furthermore, hundreds of miles separated these sites from the <br />irrigable fields of Arizona and California. Again. there were too many <br />tributaries below these sites which might cause destructive floods. <br />In the lower basin two excellent sites were found-Boulder Canyon and <br />Black Canyon. Each offered potential reservoir capacity of over 30,000,000 <br />acre-feet, but each site posed engineering problems of stupendous proportions. <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />n l75:') <br /> <br />Tht> IUacl, eURYOn Silt> <br /> <br />After having compared data from the two basins the engineers favored <br />the lower basin sites. The Bureau of Reclamation intensified invesligations <br />there by making geologic and topographic surveys, starting in 1919. These <br />investigations revealed Black Canyon to be fayored over Boulder Canyon in <br />several respect3. The depth to bedrock was less, the geologic structure was <br />better, and a dam of smaller dimensions would give the same reservoir <br />capacity. From 1920 to 1923 men actually lived in Black Canyon, diamond <br />drilling and testing the rock; for the rock had to offer an unquestionably <br />.sound foundation. It was to support the highest dam that the world had <br />ever seen. <br />The proposed dam would be so high that its reservoir could store the <br />entire flow of the Colorado River-including all average floods-for two <br />whole years. Furthermore, it would be located below the large tributaries <br />and would thus control them. It would create a po'wer head within trans- <br />mission distance of the power markets of southern California. And, it <br />would be in the midst of a heavily mineralized region in Nevada and Arizona <br />where lo\,'.cost power could be a boon to strategic metal production. <br /> <br />Looking up$tream through Black Canyon toward Boulder dam site <br />l)efore construction activities were begun. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.