Laserfiche WebLink
<br />D003~6 <br /> <br />--6- <br /> <br />who will eventually have to abandon such fertile soil because of lack of water, <br />unless this project is completed. Some are already moving away. The Pine Rj,ver <br />Extension Project means simply the enlarging or addition to the Pine River Proj- <br />ect already completed and the extension being originally contemplated when the <br />~irst dam or reservoir was built. This project is largely self-liquidating and <br />~t. may be noted that 14,000 acres of land are noVl paying construction costs of the <br />dam without any benefit whatever to the owners of such land. <br /> <br />Beyond this, the Board, because of its limited knOWledge, makes no further <br />recommendations. <br /> <br />Done at Durango, Colorado <br />this 14th day of April, 1951 <br /> <br />SOUTHVlESTERlJ WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT <br /> <br />By D. W. Sexton <br />Secretary <br /> <br />****i~************~~i~** <br /> <br />THE PINE RIVER IRRIGATION rISTRICT <br /> <br />Ignacio, Colorado <br /> <br />COMMENT OF THE PINE RIVER IRRIGATION DISTRICT 011 :lEPORI' ON THE COLORADO <br />RIVER STORAGE PROJECT AND PAHTICIPATING PllOJECTS OF THE UPPER COLORADO <br />RIVER BASIN <br />APRIL J, 1951 <br /> <br />The Pine River Irrigation District approves of the report of the Commission- <br />3r and of the Regional Director, but desires to make some reservations concerning <br />-','1e Pine River Project Extension, which is one of the approved participating proj- <br />ects recommended for authorization. <br /> <br />Our comment is fully set forth in our letters of April 4, 1949 and July 12, <br />J.949 addressed to the Colorado Water Conservation Board, and was discussed at a <br />meeting of the Colorado Water Conservation Board held in Denver, Colorado on <br />D~cember 16th and 17th, and set forth in the comment of the Board Which was ad- <br />dressed to the Regional Director under date of December 17, 1949. However, we wish <br />to very briefly outline the objections to the proposed report of the Regional <br />Director dated January of 1949. <br /> <br />I, The Pine River Irrigation District has always objected to that provision <br />of the report which provides that the persons within the District who have water <br />available for their lands would p~ the entire bala~ce of the reimbursable con- <br />struction costs of the Vallecito Reservoir, and that the persons benefitting under <br />the Project Extension will be relieved of further payment of these construction <br />~0StS. We have been orally advised that the report will be revised to eliminate <br />';his feature, but we note that in Paragraph "e" of the report of the Regional <br />Director on the Colorado River Storage Project that the Director desires that there <br />"e Districts of the Water Conservancy type "one purpose of which shall be to pro- <br />'ride revenues for the Project over and above those paid by irrigators to assist in <br />l'€payment of construction costs allocated to irrigation." Does this mean that the <br />objectional feature of the proposed report on The Pine River Project Extension is <br />to be retained? <br />