My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC05202
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
18000-18999
>
WSPC05202
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 11:42:44 AM
Creation date
10/9/2006 5:05:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
7630.625
Description
Wild and Scenic - Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
8/13/1981
Author
Various
Title
Comments - RE-South Platte River Basin Interim Report
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.
/
146
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 />O[j2~ 91 <br /> <br />Alternative 1 - Hanagement Ch'.lDges to Chatfield, Cherry Creek <br />and Bear Creek Reservoirs. .1'; view of the information presented <br />for this alternative, the fOlLowing is indicated: <br /> <br />1. The consumptive use "stimate is being applied by <br />assuming that 75,000 aore-fee.t of water is delivered <br />from this alternative, and 25,000 acre-feet would <br />be used consumptively for municipal water use. <br /> <br />2. The value placed on this water is $100 per acre- <br />foot, for the 75,000 acre-feet delivered, or <br />$7.5 million. No credit is being given for the <br />benefit or value of return flows to agriculture or <br />other municipal .or industrial uses downstream. <br /> <br />3. The feasibility of this option appears .to be highly <br />questionable, i.e., "it may be diffioult to impose <br />additional uses of reservoir storage such as for <br />municipal water supply" as indicated on Page 65. <br />It would appear that all that can be said about this <br />alternative is that it may be feasible but we really <br />don't know and that additional information is needed. <br />Comparing it with other well defined alternatives <br />such as the Narrows Project, Grey Hountain, etc., <br />appears to be unreasonable. <br /> <br />If this alternative is to be considered in the future, some <br />additional planning needs t~ be done and this should be the <br />recommendation coming from this report concerning this <br />alternative. <br /> <br />Alternative 2 - Upstream Main Stem Storage at Two Forks Reservoir. <br />Alternatives to this option appear to be (1) raising the level <br />of Chatfield Reservoir (Alternative 4), and (2) construction of <br />a reservoir on West Plum Creek to store South Platte River <br />flows (Alternative 6). On Page 66 it is stated that "another <br />possible alternative of tributary storage with 13 smaller <br />reservoirs in the Upper South Platte River Basin upstream from <br />the South Platte was not considered because they are not <br />located wi thin the study area." This seems rather incongruous <br />in that 13 reservoirs are clearly an alternative to an <br />alternative which is being discussed within this report. <br /> <br />Once again, no credit is given for the value of return flows <br />to the basin which is surprising, given the fact that this <br />is a basin-wide assessment. It also appears that the <br />consideration of alternatives is somewhat less than comprehensive <br />since alternatives to this project, i.e., 13 smaller reservoirs <br />in the Platte, are not considered. This alternative is thus <br />compared to other alternatives in the basin such as the <br />Narrows, Grey Mountain, etc., without even being compared to <br />an alternative project which is a true alternative to this <br />particular project. <br /> <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.