Laserfiche WebLink
<br />U. s. BUreAU OF Ri':C1J\EitTION RBI'ORT (CONT ID.) <br /> <br />CHERttY CREEl: P"CJJ:C;CT (cm:T 'D) <br /> <br />on the South Platte River which, though junior to the original priority <br /> <br /> <br />of Castl6Vlood reservoir, are senior to what might becrn]~ its supplemental '1' <br /> <br /> <br />enlargement priority. Assuming 100 percent yield fram the original prior <br /> <br /> <br />of 5,257 acre-feet; using the headgate diversion duties fixed by the Bureau <br /> <br /> <br />of 2.35 acre-feet per acre; and ignoring losses; the capacity of the <br /> <br /> <br />reservoir is fixed at 2,240 acres of land (exclusive of what may be irri- <br /> <br /> <br />gated by existing direct floVl diversions or re-use of return flows along <br /> <br /> <br />Cherry Creek), <br /> <br /> <br />(5) Relative to project feasibility, l1aJCimum acreage was in- <br /> <br /> <br />cluded in the proposed project by the Bureau in order to make the irri- <br /> <br /> <br />gation feature feasible, i.e. keep the annual payments within the ability <br /> <br /> <br />of the land ovmers to repay and wi thin the aIUlual net increased benefits <br /> <br /> <br />derived by the~ from the reservoir, To meet the construction charges <br /> <br /> <br />assigned by the Bureau (i.e. ';429,500 in 4o-years without interest, or <br /> <br /> <br />:,10.740 per year) would require annual payments, based on 5,257 acre-feet <br /> <br /> <br />of reservoir yield, of ,2.04 per acre-foot of water; or based on 2,240 <br /> <br /> <br />acres, of :',If.BO per acre. Such charges muy be prohibitive. <br /> <br /> <br />Had the construction charr;es against irrigation been fixed <br /> <br /> <br />by the pro-rata share of usable or total reservoir capacity (i.e. at <br /> <br /> <br />:;175,000 in 40-years without interst, or :,:4,L~00 annually), then unit <br /> <br /> <br />charges (on the above bases of reservoir yield and acreage) would have <br /> <br />become, substantia: ly, :>0.05 per aore-foot of water, or f:2.00 per acre of <br /> <br /> <br />land. Such oharges appear to be well within the ability-to-pay limitation, <br /> <br /> <br />and cOllllJ]ensurate with net inoreased benefits, thus suggesting a small but <br /> <br /> <br />feasible projeot free from the oonflicts and complio~tions attaching to <br /> <br />-15- <br /> <br /> <br />