Laserfiche WebLink
<br />000575 <br />West Divide Project (cont"d) <br /> <br />crops such as brewing barley, potatoes, and truck crops would be impor- <br />tant throughout project area. Sugar beets and fruit, particularly apples, <br />cherries, and peaches, would become increasingly important in Divide- <br />Battlement area but would not be practical in Thompson area because of <br />shorter growing season. Wheat production now practiced on a limited <br />acreage would be considerably reduced with project development. <br /> <br />Farm Units <br /> <br />Number of operating units <br />Present . . . . . . . . . . <br />With project ............ <br />Increase . . . . . . . . . . . . <br />Average economic size of farm (acres)lf <br />Divide-Battlement area <br />Class 1 <br />Cl ass 2 <br />Class 3 <br />Thompson Creek <br />Class 2 <br />Cl ass 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <br />lI' Equivalent to 160 acres of class 1 land on Dallas Creek <br /> <br />140 <br />250 <br />110 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />135 <br />148 <br />165 <br /> <br />175 <br />195 <br />Proj ect . <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />t~, <br /> <br />, <br />f <br />c_ <br /> <br />Irri~ation Water Charges <br />Recommended payments for project irrigation water <br /> Per acre Per acre-foot Total I" <br />Divide-Battlement area ~ <br />Class 1 $12.75 $3.40 $50.,000 <br />Class 2 11.00 2.90 117,000 <br />Class 3 9.00 2.40 137,000 <br />Subtota 1 304,000 <br />Thompson area <br />Class 2 9.00 2.70 2,500 <br />Cl ass 3 6.70 2.00 5,500 <br />Subtotal 8,000 <br />Total or average 10.00', 2.70 31Z,OOO <br /> <br />Estimated existinq rates for irriqation water <br /> <br />Presently irrigated lands in project area are served by a .large.number <br />of small ditch systems operated and maintained by individuals and small <br />organizations. The cost of operating and maintaining the systems varies <br />~ from practically nothing to about $2 per acre served. The average cost <br />is about $1 per acre served. Charges against water users are limited <br />to costs for ditch maintenance, there being little or no storage to <br />maintain and little or no indebtedness. The local streams are now fully <br />developed for irrigation. Further irrigation development would be de- <br />pendent on the construction of storage and diversion facilities which <br />would require repayment as well as relati,vely high operation and main- <br />tenance costs. <br /> <br />5 <br />