My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PUB00089
CWCB
>
Publications
>
Backfile
>
PUB00089
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2009 11:41:38 AM
Creation date
9/30/2006 10:16:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Publications
Year
1980
Title
Upper Colorado Resource Study: Colorado and Utah - Concluding Report May 1980
CWCB Section
Water Conservation & Drought Planning
Author
R. Keith Higginson, Commissioner
Description
Study to determine expected increases of water needs for energy-related developments along White and Yampa Rivers
Publications - Doc Type
Tech Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
165
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 /> <br />CHAPTER II <br /> <br />INTRODUCTION <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />to upper Milk Creek, a tributary of the Yampa River, by a system of <br />conduits and tunnels. A reservoir would bave been constructed on Milk <br />Creek to regulate the water supply for irrigation of about 20,000 acres <br />of land in Axial Basin of the Yampa River. Powerplants were to be <br />established on Milk Creek and along the mainstems of the Yampa and Green <br />Rivers. <br /> <br />In September 1952 another unpublished study was prepared, also <br />called the White-Yampa Diversion Project. This study considered the <br />irrigation of 32,270 acres of land in the White River Basin and the <br />Axial Basin of the Yampa drainage. The proposed storage, conveyance, <br />and power facilities were much the same as in the 1946 study. <br /> <br />Projects involving diversion of water from one basin to the other <br />were not the only ones receiving early attention. <br /> <br />In February 1957, a reconnaissance report was published entitled the <br />Yampa-White Pro;ect, in which a plan was presented that covered most of <br />the Yampa River Basin and a large part of the White River Basin. The <br />project as presented was divided into two divisions, the Craig Division <br />in the Yampa River Basin and the Meeker Division in the White River Basin. <br /> <br />The Craig division consisted of the Wessels, Hayden Mesa, Great North- <br />ern, Juniper, and Two Bar Units. The Wessels Unit was a proposed irri- <br />gation development for 6,750 acres of land along the Yampa ~iver near the <br />towns of Steamhoat Springs and Oak Creek. The Hayden Mesa Unit was a <br />potential irrigation development for 22,940 acres of land situated along <br />the south side of a 35-mile stretch of the Yampa River between Steamboat <br />Springs and Craig. The Great Northern Unit was intended to provide irri- <br />gation to 10,660 acres of land north of the Yampa River between Craig <br />and Hayden. The Juniper Unit would have provided irrigation water to <br />101,280 acres of land, including 32,920 acres in the Lower Yampa and White <br />River Basins in Colorado and 68,360 acres in the White River Basin in <br />Utah. The Ute Indian lands along the lower White River were included in <br />the Utah acreage. Power production was also a tentative consideration <br />of the Juniper Unit plan. The Two Bar Unit proposed irrigation for 4,260 <br />acres of land along the Yampa and Little Snake Rivers near their confluence. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The Meeker Division consisted of the Yellow Jacket and Flattops <br />Units. The Yellow Jacket Unit would have provided irrigation to 41,140 <br />acres of land in the White and Yampa River Basins, following much the <br />same plan as presented in the White-Yampa Diversion Project in the 1952 <br />report. Instead of a reservoir constructed on the White River, however, <br />this plan called for the enlargement of Trappers Lake, a natural lake at <br />the head of the river. The Flattops Unit was to provide 128,000 acre-feet <br />of water for municipal and industrial use in the area along the Colorado <br />River that was expected to be involved in oil shale development. It would <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.