Laserfiche WebLink
<br />f <br /> <br />I, <br /> <br />It Is di:fficult t<i> say of' Fire Mountain Canal that it isade- <br />quate for any given period because 0:1: the yay it is used. It serves 2,065 <br />acres entirely and adequately except in dryer years. It also serves 3,398 <br />acres froms0lll8 date during June, With such part of' their supplY as is <br />add.itional to their Leroux Creek f'low and storage, but seems to be a,deqllate <br />for BIlch service only in years when North Fork at its,headgate :tl_more <br />than 150 second-feet. The Canal appears to be too amall (by about the rate <br />at which Leroux Creak "Storage is drBMl) to take advantage of :tlow in North <br />Fork when that flm. is available, even for the area presently served. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />~'.. <br />;' d <br />,'~ <br /> <br />Except when Fire Mountain Canal ia cI'O'lrded very hard a flow of <br />76 second-feet is the practicable maxim1U11 delivery at present. ThiQ <br />e'1uals a duty of 72 aeres per aecOnd foot for all the lands at present <br />supplied. Upon the basi s of stock ormership by lands entirely dependent <br />on Fire Mountain Canal the duty is 57 acres per second foot. It is said <br />by O1!1Ilers on this aection of the canal that their stock ownership is suf'- <br />ficient when the canal is full. This indicates that lands allllo getting <br />water f1'l3lll Leroux Creek and other sources he:ve much too high a duty under <br />the !'ll1lount of their present stock omlership. Apparently a duty of 60 acres <br />per second foot, which is the naminal basis of canal design proposed for <br />the enlarged. canal is about right. Upon this basis presently irrigated <br />lands should r9'1uir0 a canal of 91 second feet capacity when all the lands <br />are attempting to obtain their full supply frcm the canal. <br /> <br />Based on the actual capaei ty of 76 second-feet and a duty of <br />60 aores per second foot. a full water right requires 24.75 shares of <br />Fire Mountain stock, of the present issue, per acre irrigated. On this <br />basis the area of 5,1.6:3 acres nOVf owning stock in Fire Mountain Canal &; <br />Reservoir Company would need 135.210 shares if eaehacre had full yater <br />right. The ultimate area of 8,642 acre's would require 21:3,890 shares <br />in order to provide it full water rights. It mast be recogniZed. as it is <br />an actual fact, that not every parcel of land nOllf oaming some Fire Mountain <br />stock owns enough to make a full water right. <br /> <br />Finanoial Considerations <br /> <br />Uni t value of water, per acre foot or per seoond foot. is hare <br />to fix in any case. In the present instanoe the cost of the 1IIOrks proposed <br />for the projeot is not adaptable to a simple dete:rmination or such values. . <br />There is an element of value to prasent stockholders in Fire Mountain Canal, <br />for example, in the rebuilding or the oanal, which, 'Wb.ile indel1erminate, <br />cannot be ignored. If the canal ia not rebuilt and continues to operate a3 <br />at present, very large sums ot mon"Y will be e:z:pended during the next 10 <br />years for heavy maintenance ^Which 'lIdll amount to rehabilitation or much of <br />the present canal, whioh would be a tremendous burden to present stock <br />holders. <br /> <br />The value ot this rebuilding will be reflected, when it has been <br />done. in reducedmaintenanoe cost, and probably in some reduction of oper- <br />atililg cost. At the same time, as stated above, ;I:t seems probable that even <br />for lands now served there are timllell'hen oanal capacity, especially at the <br /> <br />-7- <br />