Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Executive Summary <br /> <br />This study and request for a new headgate was prepared by the West Rhone Lateral Ditch <br />Company for consideration by the Grand Valley Irrigation Company (GVIC). The West Rhone, <br />a sub-lateral of Lateral ML-395, has operated as an organized association for over 10 years, <br />and incorporated as a non-profit mutual ditch company this year. We have established a good <br />working relationship with the other Lateral 395 shareholders, and have been successful in <br />communicating with them and obtaining their cooperation in managing the lateral. <br /> <br />Over the past several years, the West Rhone has attempted to resolve ongoing water supply <br />problems, and has analyzed six possible solutions in this study. The root of the problems <br />stems from historical engineering and water delivery practices on Laterals 395/396 that <br />continue today in spite of many changes in the water delivery requirements of the shareholders <br />on both laterals. Because of outdated engineering inherent in the system, a continued reliable <br />water supply to the West Rhone is at risk. The West Rhone has borne an ongoing shortage of <br />approximately 22 percent of its water shares for several years, and also sustains an additional <br />loss of 50 percent periodically. No other shareholders on Laterals 395/396 are at risk due to <br />these engineering problems. <br /> <br />In addition to being a complex system irom an engineering and water delivery standpoint, <br />Lateral 395 is a large lateral system that directly serves 70 shareholders, and indirectly serves <br />10 additional shareholders on Lateral 396. The combined acreage of the two laterals is 769 <br />acres, with 1,102 shares. The primary delivery systems of the two laterals are over 7.5 miles in <br />length (not including on-farm delivery ditches and pipelines). <br /> <br />Engineers with the Federal government and a private firm have conducted on-site inspections <br />oi our delivery system in an attempt to find an engineering solution. The alternative that <br />provides the most beneiits to the West Rhone, the shareholders on Lateral 395/396, and to the <br />GVIC, is Alternative 6. This alternative, discussed in detail in this study, would re-align the <br />West Rhone sub-lateral and would require a new headgate on the GVIC Mainline canal, just <br />east of where the canal crosses 21 Road. The West Rhone Lateral project would be <br />constructed in underground pressurized pipe, and would serve 105 acres of land (78 irrigated) <br />with 130 shares of water, providing a ratio of 1.66 shares per acre. <br /> <br />In addition to resolving long-standing engineering and delivery problems, the project would: <br />1) Simplify future management of the Lateral 395 and 396 delivery systems for the <br />shareholders and the GVIC; <br />2) Have no effect on the volume, head pressure, or elevation of water flowing downstream in <br />Laterals 395 or 396; <br />3) Have no effect on transport and disposal of runoff water, tailwater, waste water, or <br />administrative spill water irom Laterals 395 and 396; <br />4) Allow water not diverted by the West Rhone to remain in the GVIC Mainline canal, instead <br />of spilling into Grand Junction Drainage District wasteways. <br />5) Help preserve desirable agricultural characteristics of the area. Over 98 percent oi the <br />West Rhone lands are within the Mesa County Buffer Zone. Protecting our water supply <br />would further the goals defined by Mesa County when the Buffer Zone was established. <br /> <br />We believe constructing a new headgate and pipeline would be in the best interests of the West <br />Rhone shareholders, the shareholders on Laterals 395 and 396, and the Grand Valley Irrigation <br />Company. Therefore, the Board and shareholders of the West Rhone Lateral Ditch Company <br />respectfully request approval for a new headgate. <br /> <br />~- <br />