South Platte Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

site, have they? The benefit -cost ratio of each one in itself ?" MR. H. DAVIS: "No, we didn't do that. I think the data are in the report to support the comment that was made earlier considering the assignable flood control benefits to Bijou alone. Regardless of any plan you discuss about Bijou, the benefit cost -ratio would be less than unity. But it's sort of like the spillway on a dam and reservoir. It may be an inherent cost to maintain the stream channel down below once you have a main stem reservoir in place. So maybe we have to look at it as part of the in- herent cost and we can't expect the benefits to support it fully. But that is a problem. Of course, there may be some differences as to most effective control. Whether the control on Bijou can be accomplished just as well up at Hoyt or whether it must be nearer the mouth of Bijou." MR. GILDERSLEEVE: "The only thing that struck me was that this construction cost of $7,900,000 was not very much larger than the $6 million plus which the dykes and channel into the Narrows Reservoir would cost." MR. H. DAVIS: "Yes, that's right. Of course, if you would follow through and say that Hoyt would benefit irrigation and make a cost allocation to irriga- tion, and then we'd have to get a repayment con- tract for that irrigation allocation too, or at least some part of it." MR. GILDERSLEEVE: "I would like to get an expression of opinion from the committee as to whether they feel any further study is required as far as the Hoyt Dam is concerned. How do you feel, Mr. Sloan ?" MR. SLOAN: "I'm about ready to offer a motion that we eliminate that study of Bijou Creek from the study of the South Platte." MR. GILDERSLEEVE: "Is there any second to that motion ?" MR. BARKLEY: "Are we talking about Hoyt Reservoir or are we eliminating the studying of anything to replace, or any possible replacement, by sway of Public Law 566 or any other method ?" 1510