My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01741
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01741
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:06:30 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:01:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
6/20/1955
Description
Minutes and Resolution
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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 />570 <br /> <br />a. The project as recommended by the Bureau of <br />Reclamation is not the most economical project <br />which can be conceived for the area to be <br />benefited. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />b. The recommended power features of the project <br />cannot be justified from an engineering or <br />economic standpoint. <br /> <br />'c. A reservoir with.a capacity of 1,000,000 acre-feet <br />cannot be justified from an engineering <br />standpoint. <br /> <br />d. The reduction in flood control benefits from <br />the sum of.$36l,000 as found by both the <br />Bureau of Reclamation and Corps. of Engineers <br />in 1940, to the sum of $177,000, as stated in <br />the supplemental report of the Bureau of <br />Reclamation, appears unrealistic particularly <br />when considered in the light of substantial <br />increase which has occurred since 1940 in crop <br />and property values. <br /> <br />The State of Colorado then recommended that the project <br />be re-studied with the view of attaining the following major <br />objectives: <br /> <br />a. The determination of the most economical reservoir <br />for the area; that is, the reservoir which will <br />provide the greatest benefit at the least cost. <br /> <br />b. The determination of the manner in which the <br />o~ration of the reservoir can be coordinated with <br />the USe of ground-water storage not only by means <br />of existing pumps but also by means of the sub- <br />irrigation method which is practiced throughout a <br />portion of area north of the Rio Grande. <br /> <br />c. The determination of flood control benefits taking <br />into consideration not only benefits to Colorado <br />but also the benefits that were claimed for the I <br />proposed State Line Chiflo Reservoir by the Corps <br />of Engineers in its report on the Middle Rio Grande <br />Proj"t ,ntitl,d "Rio Grand, and Trib"tari" in . <br />New Mexico, Survey for Flood Control, Albuquerque <br />District, Albuquerque, New Mexico." <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.