FLOOD01459

• County: Gunnison
• Community: Uncompahgre Valley
• Title: Upper Gunnison-Uncompahgre Basin Phase 1 Feasibility Study Summary Report
• Date: 5/1/1989
• Prepared For: Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority
• Prepared By: HDR Engineering, Inc.
• Floodplain - Doc Type: Project

II
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

These needs were reviewed from the standpoint of identifying a practical,
economical means of satisfying the particular need. It was decided that
structural measures to satisfy only streamflow deficiencies, only flood
control, or only these two in combination would not be warranted from an
economic and environmental perspective. Therefore, the sub-basins
experiencing irrigation shortages, as well as other needs, and the Slate River
whi ch experiences signifi cant water qual i ty probl ems were selected as the
sub-bas ins to be studi ed for potential mult ipurpose structural components.
This resulted in eight sub-basins being investigated for potential structural
components.

Several storage reservoirs were investigated to mitigate the water
quality problems on the Slate River by providing dilution releases. These
reservoirs were eliminated from further consideration on the basis of high
cost and their locations in environmentally sensitive areas.

Two types of structural components were identified to meet future
agricultural demands: conveyance systems to transfer water from one sub-basin
to another, and storage reservoirs. These were evaluated, and it was
determined that conveyance systems were not economically feasible and that
storage reservoirs provided the only practical means of meeting projected
future agricultural water demands.

A total of 57 potential reservoir sites were identified in the seven
sub-basins identified as having irrigation shortages. A preliminary screening
of these 57 sites resulted in retaining eight alternative sites located in
three different sub-basins. Four of the seven sub-basins were eliminated fro~
further consideration because the shortages in these sub-basins were very
small in magnitude and the structural measures identified to satisfy the
shortages were found to be very costly. Eight reservoir sites were retained
for further study. These were: the Los Pinos and Paul ine sites in the
Cochetopa Creek sub-basin; the Castleton site in the Ohio Creek sub-basin; and
the Elko and Sargents No.1, 2, 3 and 4 sites in the Tomichi Creek sub-basin.
The 1 ocati ons of these potent i a 1 reservoi r sites are shown on Fi gure 5.1.

5-7