|
<br />0815
<br />
<br />26
<br />
<br />FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT, COLORADO
<br />
<br />The Bureau's report indicu.tes that the Arkll.TISB.S River development
<br />by itself woulu have suhstantial benefits. A large benefit would be
<br />realized from the Hood control provided' by the Pueblo Reservoir.
<br />In addition, the project eould provide Illunicipal ,vater in the same
<br />n.mount ns l~stimllted for t,he proposed pro/'eet (nnmc1y, 20,500 !lCfe-
<br />feet) as well "s 71,.500 "ere-feet for supp emental irrigation, which
<br />would mll..terin.lly relieve present shortnges in supply.
<br />The remainder of the projm.:t as proposed, including the trUI1SmOUll-
<br />tnm diversion fCllturcs and the power system and involving It cost of
<br />about, $110 million, sbonld be deferred for further eonsidemtion of
<br />questions of feasibility and economic justificllt.ion. Such II procedure
<br />would be in liue with the reeommenuatious originally mude by bot,h
<br />the Budget Bureau and the Department of Agriculture in report,ing
<br />on the pl'Oject,
<br />4. Test.imony before the committee uuring extended hearings lust
<br />yellr as well as this year. indicates beyond refute thn.t this projcct is
<br />not. in the best int.erest of eit.her our nittionnl economy or the itgri-
<br />cult,ural problem thut confronts the entire Nil.tion, This WitS sub-
<br />stantiated by facts nnd figures presented to the subcommittee in
<br />prepilred stlltemcnts nlla in response to questions raised during the
<br />course of t.he testimony.
<br />The following lltilizut,ion of t.he 280,000 aeres was submitte,] by the
<br />Burellll of Rcclamation:
<br />
<br />Crops, acreages, yield8, and returns to farmers, southea8tern Colorado Conservancy
<br />Di8lrirt, Fryingpan-Arkan.<;as project, Colorado
<br />
<br /> Acre~l!:e- Yleld-
<br /> Orop Unit
<br /> Without With Without Wllh
<br /> Th01l3awu ThD1Ualld, Tlloltsumb Thou8u71a3
<br />AU31h_._______. .----.------------- 126.9 119.8 400 51' TOll.
<br />For~gc__._______________ ----------- "u ',0 ------4;90;.- ------------
<br />(Jrllins_____________ -.-------------- 109.1 ll~. 6 6,91).1 Bushol.
<br />Suj::llrhf'NS______________________ ,. 15.11 22.6 :203 3~5 Ton.
<br />ne3J]~_._____________________________ 4.3 ,,' 4,924 ;.149 Pound.
<br />}.ruil-ve~,etn.h]es__. ______________ _.__ 11.5 (I.U 1.204 ].594 Hunrlreclweigbt,
<br />Sc('<lcrups_____________________._____ 3.4 1.0 1,005 355 Pound.
<br />Porrorn__________.__________________ 4 0 3.3 7,6\8 8.714 Do.
<br />Tol~lL______.__________________ 250.0 280.6 -.---------- , ---------
<br />
<br />It. wus further stute,] by Mr. Y Dung, president of the SoutheHsteru
<br />lV titer COnSCI'VlUle,\" District thnt the Arkansas Valley presently pro-
<br />duees llPproximlltely SO,OOO heml of eu!.tle, 140,000 bIllbs, 850,000
<br />turkeys Hnd chickcns, tLnd 14,500 milk cows each yellI'. In response
<br />to quest,iolling he illdicated that t.hcre would ue sllbst.tlllti~ll incrcHses
<br />ill t.he production of each of these livestock categories wcre the projec~
<br />to hl~(;Omf' a rculit,y.
<br />\Vi thou t. furt.her det,nils relative to each of t.hese specific products,
<br />let, liS cX:lluine brieHy t.he (legrf'o t.o whit:h the present, ngl'iculturnl
<br />sllrplus problem would be aggravated by the inrretlsed production of
<br />these agriculturul commodities. .
<br />First, we not.c Umt there would be in addition t.o t.lIe anticipated
<br />increase in livestock product,ion, ltll HllllUlll incrensc of 11.5,000 t.ons
<br />of nlfulfn Itay, 2 1.ni.llion bushels of smltll gl'l1ins, 152,000 tons of sugar-
<br />beets, tllHl 2.2 ffillhon pounds of beans. These increases would come
<br />
|