Laserfiche WebLink
<br />D~,....'n"I[P"T"''' <br /> <br />Ca....~.PDNal..c...LY <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT <br /> <br />COLORADO <br /> <br />5 U." ICT..__n_....u_..............__......... <br /> <br />- 2 - <br /> <br />S. Diversion of 271,)00 acre feet anmally, equal to a yearly average flow <br />of approx:i.Eatel:-~ 37u second feet, from the Blue river and its tributaries <br />to the Eastern Slope. This amount is more than half of the annual average <br />of u28,300 acre feet passinp through Green ~untaln reservoir. Collec- <br />tion would be accOOlplished by canals interceptinr flows of the numerous <br />small streams along the Eastern slope of the Gore range and Western slope <br />of the Williams River Yountains plus diversions from the Blue and Snake <br />rivers and tenmile creek. <br /> <br />':;uch diversions, especially from the small tributary streams, lfOuld large- <br />ly destroy stream. fishing in this area. Properly regulated flows from <br />Termrl.1e and Snake reservoirs 'nOuld materially reduce this loss. <br /> <br />6. Construction of Tenmi1e reservoir five miles southwest of . Frisco, with <br />141,500 acre feet storage capacity. <br /> <br />Considerable fluctuation, plus fIlling with the polluted waters of Ten- <br />mile creek, would greatly reduce fisheries values within this reservoir. <br />!t would serve, however, to settle out much of the polluting materials <br />so that possible releases might create favorable stream habitat downstream <br />to Green lIountain reservoir. <br /> <br />7. Construction of Blue reservoir on the Blue river four and a half miles south <br />of Dillon, with LO,OOO acre feet capacity. <br /> <br />Fluctuation would be severe on this reservoir, greatly reducing possible <br />fisheries values. <br /> <br />6. Construction of Snake reservoir on the Snake river two miles East of <br />Dillon, with 272,000 acre feet capacity. <br /> <br />Th~s reservoir would be conpected by submerged tunnel to the Blue reser- <br />voir, so that they would operate as a single body of water. .'ih.ile the <br />storage would be considerable, 80 would the nuctuation. Important fish- <br />eries values could be expected despite adverse nuctuationa. <br /> <br />9. Diversion of )0,600 acre feet annually, equal to a yearly averar,e flow <br />of approximtcl~' U2 second feet, froI:1 the upper Williams (Williams Fork <br />of the Colorado) river, via canal and turmel to the Snake reservoir. <br /> <br />I.oss of these flows would be of detriment to fisheries along the entire <br />length of this stream. <br /> <br />EASTrnN SlDPE <br /> <br />1. Chan.'1el "improvements" o~ the North Fork of the South Platte from two <br />and a half miles above Grant, where lre'stern slope waters would be deliv- <br />ered from the Snake reservoir via the Montezuma tun.~l, to the village of <br />South Platte. <br /> <br />2565 <br />