WSP10987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

22 COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT Flood-control ben,efits Preliminary a~praisals by the Corps of Engineers indicate that the reduction in floo(1 damage that will result from operation of the autho~- ized project devtllopments will average $124,000 annually. The b~ne- fits are equal td the different between the flood damage that is ex- pected to occur lvith and without the project. The corps will further evaluate flood-cllntrol benefits in connection with definite plan studies. Fish and wildlife benefits Effects of pllJ'ticipating projects on fish and wildlife resources, both beneficial and adverse have been partially evaluated by the ,Fish and Wildlife Service. The total adverse effects for the projects studied were found to exceed t,he total benefits by an average of $5,000 an- nually. No evaluation, however, has been made of the effects of the storage units on fish and wildlife, The example of Lake Mead sug- gests that the net benefits of the lllJ'ge storage reservoirs may be substantial. Fqrther evaluation of fish and wildlife benefits will be made as a part 'ilf pre-construction surveys. ReC1'eational benijits The National Park Service estimates the recreational, benefits of the authorized projects and units studied to date at $698,000 annually, The estimate is generally based on the service's judgment that annual benefits of the specific (Federal and non-Federal) recreational facilitics included in freh:minary plans are at least equal to the annual equiva- lent cost 0 coostructing, operat.ing, and maintaining the facilities and that It like benefit value will accrue from the recreational use of dams and rcsel",oirs, The eVAluation of recreational benefits will be continued in proconstructioll surveys. Other benefits A number of minor benefits in addition to those mentioned may be expected from pi'oi' ect development, The only one so far evaluated is a sediment contro benefit in connection with a potential reserVoir of the central Utlih project which, according to an estimate by the Bureau of Indi~n Affairs, will have a value of $2,000 ,annually in preventing sedirpentation of Indian irrigation canals. , AVERAGE ANNUAL EQUIVALENT COSTS Determination oj costs For compllJ'is6n with the average annual benefits, an ,estimatc was, made of the average annual equivalent Federal cost of development. This cost includes the Federal investment amortized over the 100-year period of analysis at 2M percent interest and annual operation, main- tenance, and r;'plaoement costs. Construction costs used in the benefit-cost anl\lysis do not include pllBt investigation costs since these do not b~ar on the advisability of future expenditures. Also they do not incl\lde contributed funds for the Glen Canyon bridge and highway nor costs of constructing certain central Utah project features to ultimate pheae capacity since no evaluations have been made of benefits from SUch expenditures. Interest on expenditures during the construction period is added to construction costs, An amount