Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />being the opinion of many that an analysis of such impacts would <br />show that the costs of water project development in the canyon <br />exceed the benefits. Such comments also seem to stem, at least <br />in part, from the perception that a final decision to proceed <br />with a project is close at hand and will be made without <br />consideration being given to environmental, recreational, and <br />social impacts. <br /> <br />Comments concerning analytical techniques and methodologies <br />related primarily to the economic evaluations. The matter of the <br />proper discount rate and its use, and the procedures for <br />estimating hydropower benefits, have received the most <br />attention. This is understandable in light of the fact that the <br />study fOCUSes on economic evaluation criteria and in light of the <br />fact that estimated peaking power benefits account for nearly all <br />of the benefits accruing from the multiple reservoir alternatives <br />(see Table VI-7 in the Interim R.eport or Table 7 in the <br />Addendum) . <br /> <br />Discussion of Public Comments <br /> <br />The Board has been charged by the General Assembly with the <br />task of performing this study in as professional a manner as <br />possible within the limitation of time, budget, and scope which <br />the legislature has established. The termination of the study, <br />at this time, as some have urged, is neither within the Board's <br />discretion nor appropriate. The advantages and disadvantages of <br />potential project development or of inclusion of the Cache la <br />poudre in the national wild and scenic rivers system cannot be <br />intelligently weighed and debated until proper study of both has <br />been completed. <br /> <br />By the same token, any decision to proceed with development <br />of a water project on the Cache la poudre will require <br />considerably more information than will be generated by this <br />study. This is true with respe~t to both the analysis of means <br />other than water projects in the Canyon to serve the three <br />primary purposes identified earlier and the assessment of the <br />environmental, recreational, and social impacts which a water <br />project would have. <br /> <br />While many people are urging the Board to recommend to the <br />General Assembly that any further studies should encompass an <br />evaluation of alternatives to damming the Cache la Poudre, the <br />Board need not address this matter at this time. Likewise, the <br />matter of assessing the environmental, recreational, and social <br />impacts of alternative projects is not something to which the <br />Board needs address itself. In both instances, this is because <br />of the limitations imposed upon the study by the legiSlature. <br /> <br />The staff has pointed out that the study does not, at this <br />point, support the conclusion that any potential project is or is <br /> <br />~3- <br />