My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPP00139
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
20000-20849
>
WSPP00139
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 10:47:40 AM
Creation date
10/1/2006 2:08:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.300.40.A
Description
Colorado River Basin-Colorado River Basin Legislation/Law-Compacts-Colorado River Compact
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
2/1/1981
Title
Colorado River Compact-Synopsis of Major Documents-Colorado Water-Key to Tomorrows Quality of Life
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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 />',,,'~ ..' <br /> <br />FRUITLAND MESA <br /> <br />j <br />j <br /> <br />Location: <br />North of the Gunnison River In Delta, Montrose and <br />Gunnison counties, <br /> <br />Sponsor: <br />Fruitland Mesa Water Conservancy District. <br /> <br />Primary Purpose of the Project: <br /> <br />Irrigation, Domestic. <br /> <br />Secondary Benefits: <br /> <br />Some recreation, municipal and industrial (coal) potential. <br /> <br />History and BaCkground: <br /> <br />The Fruitland Mesa Water Conservancy District was <br />established in 1960 and Congress authorized construction <br />of the project four years later. Funds were subsequently <br />appropriated by Congress and then rescinded in 1977. <br />Since that time, Congress has consistently refused to <br />appropriate even modest sums for redesign of the project. <br />The Colorado RiverWater Conservation District provided <br />a new, scaled-down design of the project for the local <br />district, and the Colorado Water Conservation Board has <br />agreed to fund half the cost of a feasibility study on the <br />redesigned project. The project, iocated above the coal- <br />rich North Fork of the Gunnison Valley, has been scaled <br />down to enlargement and rehabilitation of the Gould <br />Reservoir and construction of a 10-mile open ditch <br />collection system at the lower end of Black Mesa plus <br />some improvement to the Fruitland Mesa Canal. Although <br />there is a substantial amount of irrigable land in the area, <br />crop production is limited due to a severe shortage of late <br />season water. With the scaling down of the project, <br />Irrigation Is limited to 9,000 acres: 2,600 tull service and <br />7,400 supplemental. As redesigned, the project can poten- <br />tially increase the iivestock population of the area by <br /> <br />10,000 head of cattle. With increased growth in the North <br />Fork Valley as a result of coal development, the project's <br />value as a future, optional source of municipal and <br />industrial water increases, Also, new residences to house <br />mine workers in the project area and further increase <br />water demand are being developed. <br /> <br />Physical Facts and Figures: <br /> <br />Height, length and type of dam: Increase height of <br />existing earthfili dam from 55 to 80 feet <br /> <br />Storage capacity (A.F.) of reservoir: Increase from 8,400 <br />to 16,600 <br /> <br />Shoreline and surface area: Shoreline from 2.5 to 4 <br />miles; surface area from 300 to 500 acres <br /> <br />Average annual power generation: N/A <br /> <br />Population to be served: 600 plus anticipated increases <br /> <br />Irrigated acres to be served: 2,600 full supply 6,400 <br />supplemental <br /> <br />Estimated cost: $7,000,000 <br /> <br />Construction schedule: Start In 1982. completion one <br />year later <br /> <br />Proposed Sources of Funding: <br /> <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board's revolving fund <br />and/or the Water and Power Resources Service Small <br />Projects Program. <br /> <br />For Further Information Contact: <br />Edward J. Currier; Engineer <br />Western Engineers, <br />P.O. Box 571, Grand Junction, CO 81501 <br />242-5202 <br /> <br />SAVERY-POT HOOK <br /> <br />Location: <br /> <br />In the Little Snake River Basin near Baggs on both sides of <br />the Colorado-Wyoming border. <br /> <br />Sponsor: <br /> <br />Pot Hook Water Conservancy District In Colorado. <br /> <br />Primary Purpose of the Project: <br />Irrigation. <br /> <br />Secondary Benefit: <br />Recreation: <br /> <br />History and Background: <br /> <br />The greatest need in the Little Snake Valley is for stabilized <br />agricultural water supply. With the limited reservoir <br />storage now available, the area averages about 28 per cent <br />of Ideal diversion requirements. This limitation has <br />prevented agricultural expansion and forced the area's <br />young people to go elsewhere for a livelihood. The project <br /> <br />is sponsored by two conservancy districts, one in <br />Colorado and one In Wyoming. The districts were created <br />in 1960 and the project was authorized by Congress in <br />1964. Both districts have approved a repayment plan. The <br />project Included $4 million for environmental and <br />recreational considerations and is expected to contribute <br />$2.5 million annually to the economy of the Little Snake <br />Valiey. Additionally, the project would reduce erosion and <br />sediment deposits In the malnstem Colorado River by <br />flOOd control regulation of spring flows into the Little <br />Snake River from Savery and Slater creeks. A definite plan <br />report and final Environmental Impact Statement were <br />completed In 1977 when President Carter successfully <br />deleted construction funds from the publiC works budget. <br />The project has remained essentially stagnant since. Main <br />components of the project are Sandstone Reservoir on <br />Savery Creek In Wyoming and Pot Hood Reservoir on <br />Slater Creek In Colorado plus 62 miles of canal. Savery- <br />Pot H.ook would very positively affect beef prices In that it <br />would send five million pounds of red meat to the market <br />place annually. <br /> <br />(Continued on next page) <br /> <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.