My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC01715
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
14000-14999
>
WSPC01715
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 11:13:44 AM
Creation date
10/9/2006 2:56:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.400
Description
Colorado River - Colorado River Basin - Colorado River Basin Briefing Documents/History/Corresp.
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
1/1/3000
Author
Clifford H Stone
Title
Upper Colorado River - Basin Compact - Memo: Comments on Article By Leslie A Miller Appearing in Saturday Evening Post as Such Article Relates to the Colorado-big Thompson Project
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />I <br /> <br />J <br /> <br />000252 <br /> <br />," <br /> <br />? <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br />---------- <br /> <br />COmlllents on Article bv Leslie A. I,iiller appearing in <br />Sitturdav ~vening post as such article relates to the <br />--- Colorado-J:lig Thompson Project-, ~olorado <br /> <br />By Clifford H. Stone, Director <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br /> <br />Leslie A. Killer, former Governor of Wyoming, is the author of an article, <br />entitled "The Battle that Squanders BillionS," which recently appeared in the <br />Saturday Evening Post. In his effort to support the theme of his article, h'.r. <br />Miller cites the Colorado-Big Thompson as an example of un\vise planning and <br />unjustified expenditure of public monies. <br /> <br />\Vhile more efficient functioning of the Departments of Government is a worthy <br />objective and the avoidance of waste in Government expenditures is desired by <br />all, yet it cannot be doubted that Mr. Miller has given aid and comfort to foes <br />of ';Jestern reclamation. And he does not present any constructive suggestions <br />as to hOlv the economic well being and development in the ..est may be accomp- <br />lished under present conditions. And even worse, the author of the article in <br />using the Colorado-Big Thompson project as an example to support his views fails <br />to mention many material facts about that project which leaves with the average <br />readers false impressions. It is the purpose of this memorandum to set forth <br />some of these facts about the project which in all fairness should be kept in <br />mind in appraising the situation. <br /> <br />1. <br /> <br />Brief Legislative Histo~ of Froject. Congress made initial <br />appropriation for the Co orado-Big Thompson Project in the <br />Interior Department Appropriations Act of August 9, 1931, <br />(50 Stat. 595), in accordance with the plan set forth in <br />Senate Document No. 60, 15th Congress. Finding of Feasibil- <br />ity for the Project was approved by the President, December <br />21, 1937. The total estimated cost of the proposed project <br />at that time was ~43,479,422. <br /> <br />Increase in Cost (Inflation). In common with all public and <br />private construction, the estimated costs of this project <br />have increased. This is an economic condition which cannot <br />be charged to the Bureau of Reclamation or to any other agency <br />of the Government. During the twelve-year period between the <br />time of the preliminary estimate used in Senate Document 80 <br />and the present, prices for project type construction have <br />increased by at least 115 per cent, giving a cost index of <br />215 per cent using 1940 prices as a base. Admittedly this <br />total increase does not apply in total to those features of <br />the project which were completed early in the cost rise <br />period. Analysis of the proportion of construction completed <br />prior to major price rises compared to proportion of construction <br />completely affected by cost rises indicates that a general index <br />factor of 195 per cent is applicable to the project as a whole <br />as of this date. <br /> <br />2. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.