My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
LPPD000368
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
LPPD000368
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/19/2009 11:01:19 AM
Creation date
3/26/2007 10:30:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C150140
Contractor Name
Toyne, Glenn
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
1
County
Sedgwick
Loan Projects - Doc Type
Feasibility Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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 />A1ternatives Evaluated <br /> <br />A range of alternatives were considered on how to generate an <br />augmentation supply for the Toyne farm including 1) don't build a <br />project and continue to solely rely upon GASP for augmentation, <br />2) purchase a senior water right and use it for augmentation, 3) <br />construct a recharge pond filled using a recharge well, identical <br />to operations on the Tamarack Ranch. <br /> <br />A subjective evaluation of the alternatives follows: <br /> <br />1. Don't build a project: <br /> <br />If a project were not pursued, the Toyne farm would continue <br />to solely rely upon GASP for augmentation. Even though GASP <br />has provided augmentation coverage for the past 30 years, <br />there is no certainty of total augmentation coverage with <br />the GASP plan. Supplies currently used to augment the 8 <br />Toyne wells are entirely secured by GASP on a one-year lease <br />basis. If any of these leases are not renewed or can not be <br />renewed because of the extreme drought conditions, the Toyne <br />farm could not operate their wells. This would be an annual <br />loss of approximately 1,100 acre feet of irrigation water. <br />This event, if it occurred, could lead to a major loss of <br />crops under their farm. This alternative at one time may <br />have been considered acceptable but due to the continuing <br />changes in the water community this is no longer an <br />acceptable alternative. <br /> <br />2. Purchase a senior water right and use it for <br />augmentation: <br /> <br />This alternative is currently used by many front range <br />municipalities for the very same reason. The City of Parker <br />has even purchased water rights slightly up river from the <br />Toyne farm for augmenting environmental issues they have. A <br />recently available senior water right for sale in their area <br />would have come with the purchase of a farm controlling the <br />Ramsey Ditch. The Ramsey Ditch is a 12 cfs direct flow right <br />with a date of August 1894. In order to obtain the water <br />right, the entire farm would have had to been purchased at a <br />price of $1.25 million. This price does not even include the <br />legal fees associated with converting the water right over <br />to augmentation use. This alternative may be financially <br />acceptable to someone like Parker but not to Glenn Toyne. <br /> <br />Feasibility Study <br />Glenn Toyne <br />Recharge Project <br />February 2003 <br /> <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.