Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001416 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br /> -10- <br />8. Upper Basin-Potential Export Diversions (Cont 'd) I <br /> Yield Cost <br /> (Acre Feet) ($1000 ) <br /> Blue-South Platte 466,000 143 ,000 <br /> Frying Pan-Arkansas 53,000 2.500 <br /> Twin Lakes Tunnel 6,600 300 <br /> Gunnison-Arkansas 410,000 84.000 <br /> Gunnison-Rio Grande 10,000 200 <br /> Sub-'fotal 945,600 235,000 <br /> Weminuche Pass 21,000 265 <br /> Piedra-Rio Grande ~O,OOO 8,200 <br /> --- <br /> Sub-Total 91,000 8,465 <br /> Total in Colorado 1,036,600 243 ,465 <br /> <br />() <br /> <br />(c) San Juan-Chama, estimated cost $19,968,000 for landS <br />in New 11exico. <br /> <br />NOTE (12)1 <br /> <br />In the Colorado statement of July 20, 19Ui, the total exportations <br />of all oonstructed enterprises and their ::-robablQ extensions. and <br />all projects \Ulder construction and authorized and all contem- <br />plated and possible future projects, was estimated at 2.000.000 <br />a.ore feet in a year of normal precipitation and runoff. Of this <br />total the completed enterprises and those under construction were <br />estimated at 445,700 acre feet. and all others at 1.554.300 acre <br />feet. These othar projects might divert. during a drouth cycle <br />such as 1931-1940, perhaps 1,240.000 acre feet, - a figure com- <br />parable to the 1.036,600 acre feet given in the Report for poten- <br />tial exportations. In brief, the Bureau has excluded about <br />200.000 AF (drouth oycle) or 250.000 AF (normal) of the exporta- <br />tions in Colorado which heretofore have been considered probable <br />or pos sib Ie. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />NOTE (13), In connection with the potential exportation projects in Colorado <br />particularly the Blue-South Platte and Gunnison-Arkansas. the <br />Bureau of Recllllllation has included the cost of power and other <br />fa.oilities in the importing basins, but has not included eithar <br />the quantities of power generated or the areas of land benefited <br />by such projects. This results in a distorted picture. and. when <br />the South Platte and Arkansas River Basin Reports are prepared,' <br />will result in duplicntion and confusion. It is recommended that <br />estimated costs be revised to include only the west slope features. <br />or that the power produced and the areas benefited in the import- <br />ing basins be included, along with total costs, as though a part <br />of the Colorado River Basin, which by the Compact they are. <br /> <br />. <br />