C153604 Feasibility Study - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . not been included in future projected revenues on the basis that n cannot be predicted or guaranteed in the future, The projected future budget is summarized in the last column of Table 3, . Economic Imeact At a minimum, the District will realize a gain of 3,700 acre-feet in reservoir storage capacity wnh the outlet rehabilitation, 60 percent (2,200 acre-feet) of which will be delivered to the fields for Irrigation, This equates to about five percent of the farm headgate requirement for the Julesburg Irrigation District. Under the worst case scenario whereby the State Engineer's Office would allow no storage In the reservoir due to safety problems associated with the existing outlet works (assuming no repairs), a potential reduction of about 13,400 acre-feet in the farm head gate deliveries would occur (Including the 2,200 acre-feet of gain due to outlet repair), which equates to about 30 percent of the overall water supply, Table 13 shows the derivation of the above values, . . . Reservoir irrigation releases generally occur In July and August in order to supplement the direct flow Irrigation diversion during the hottest part of the growing season when crop consumptive use requirements are the greatest and the available flow in the South Platte begins to decline. A reduction of Irrigation water during this period would negatively affect crop production, Conversely, an Increase in water supply will help insure good crop production through this critical growth period, . The average annual value of crops produced in the District, assuming 1989 crop prices, is about $6,887,000 (see Table 5), If it is assumed that a five percent increase in the District water supply (2,200 acre-feet) would result in a five percent increase in crop yields, regaining full reservoir capacny through fixing the reservoir outlet would equate to an increase of about $344,000 per year In farm revenue (5% of $6,887,000). Assuming a 30 percent reduction of water supply would translate into a 30 percent reduction in farmed acreage and, correspondingly, a 30 percent reduction in crop yields, the loss of use of the reservoir due to dam safety concerns would equate to an annual loss in farm revenue of about $2,066,000 per year (30% of $6,887,000), . . Evaluation of Alternatives Based upon a strict cost-benefit analysis alone, Alternative A in Table 11 would be the selec1ed rehabilitation alternative for the outlet works, For all alternatives A through F in Tables 11 and 12, the primary benefits of maintaining an operational structure and increasing the usable storage by 3,700 acre-feet are the same. . 19 .