Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />The existing reservoir provides supplemental water to about 1,140 acres of irrigated land. The <br />land receives early season water from direct diversions from the LaPlata River, when the ditches <br />are not in priority reservoir share holders can call for water from the reservoir. The 1,140 acres <br />presently has about a 54% average annual supply. Approximately 640 acres is sprinkler <br />irrigated, with additional sprinkler systems installed each year. There are 1,172 shares in the <br />reservoir based on one share per acre-foot of capacity. Enlargement of the reservoir would <br />provide about 2,500 acre-feet of additional irrigation storage, assuming that all of the water was <br />used on the present 1,140 acres the average annual supply would increase to about 88%. The <br />irrigation water would still be shorted in dry years. <br /> <br />In addition to providing irrigation water, the enlargement would include 330 acre-feet of <br />domestic water storage. The reservoir would be operated so that the domestic water always had <br />a full supply. <br /> <br />A daily operation study of the LaPlata River from 1975 to 1992 showed that there is sufficient <br />water available under the Company's 120 cfs diversion right from the LaPlata River and 4,070 <br />acre- feet of storage rights to use all or most of the enlarged capacity in 16 of the 18 year study <br />period. <br /> <br />Feasibility level cost estimates in 1995 for the enlargement resulted in an estimated project cost <br />of $3,000,000. The CWCB will provide a construction loan for 75% of the cost, $2,250,000 at <br />4.1 % for 30 years. The Company will provide 25% of the construction cost and the annual debt <br />service through assessments to existing shares but primarily through sale of new irrigation and <br />domestic shares. The domestic water shares would be charged about 10 times the cost of <br />irrigation water. <br /> <br />Conclusion <br />The project as described in this report is not feasible due to the inability of the Red Mesa Ward <br />Reservoir and Ditch Company to divert it's winter water rights into Red Mesa Reservoir. <br /> <br />2 <br />