Laserfiche WebLink
<br />i -OULL; <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />., <br /> <br />The states of Colorado and Wyoming both agree to the need for <br />recreational facilities in this area and have encouraged the develop- <br />ment of water-based recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement. <br />Other benefits are erosion control and sediment deposits into the <br />COlorado River main stneam that will be controlled by the proposed <br />flood control regulation of spring flows into the Snake River from <br />Savery and Slater Creeks. <br /> <br />The Savery-Pot Hook project area lies in a somewhat isolated <br />section of Colorado and Wyoming. While there is great local interest <br />and support for the project, the relatively small number of people <br />involved have not been able to generate any great pOlitical support <br />for their project. However, the project is sound and would contribute <br />considerably to the economic base of the Little Snake River Valley. <br /> <br />No funds for the project were included in the President's recom- <br />mended budget for FY 1979. Imagined (but not actual) adverse environ- <br />mental impacts and an unfavorable benefit-cost ratio were the reasons <br />advanced by the President for his ill-advised action. The project had <br />a favorable benefit-cost ratio until recently, but has now been <br />manipulated into 'an unfavorable configuration. At the present time, <br />there appears to be little or no chance of securing construction funds. <br /> <br />Every attempt should be made to keep the project alive. There <br />is a good possibility that a more favorable benefit-cost ratio can be <br />d8monstrated with some project reformulation. It is the staff recom- <br />mendation that the Governor and Colorado's congressional delegation <br />be requested to se~{ an FY 1979 appropriation of $75,000 for continued <br />advance planning on the Savery-Pot Hook project. <br /> <br />FLS:tam <br /> <br />-4- <br />