WSP01434 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . cr CJ C -- c., No final decision has been made by the State of Utah as to its attitude towards the project. However, it appears that the project will have the lowest priority among Utah's projects. This being the case the State of Utah will not have the necessary power revenues to construct its portion of the project for a period of at least fifteen years in the future. There is also considerable doubt as to whether Utah will have the necessary remaining water resources for the project. As can be seen from the project summary, repayment for the power features of the final project would require a period of 88 years. Under such circumstances the project could not be con- structed as a participating project of the colorado River Storage Project Act, since all features of the project must be repaid within a fifty year period. The project could conceivably be con- structed as a main stem unit. In such case the power revenues from the other projects would be diverted from irrigation use to repay a part of the Juniper power costs. This could be done by amendment to Public Law 485. We seriously question, however, the wisdom of diverting revenues which would otherwise accrue to our water development projects for the repayment of power costs. It is therefore our conclusion, upon the information pre- sented in the recent reconnaissance report, that the final phase of the Juniper Project will never be constructed. In the initial phase of the project, which would be charge- able solely to Colorado, the power features of the project can be repaid within the necessary fifty year period, but power would contribute nothing to irrigation repayment. In the initial phase of the project, irrigated acreage in Colorado is computed at 9,000 acres. However, 1,500 acres of presently irrigated land would be inundated by the reservoir site. The net acreage would therefore be 7,500 acres. The development cost per acre is extremely high and stream depletion per acre is also very high. Lands to be irrigated by the project are all new lands and would present a settlement problem. The project report also recites that upon detailed classification it could be expected that a 15% to 20% reduction in the total amount of the lands would take place. The project shows a good benefit-cost ratio. This can be attributed in part to very significant fishery and recreational values. In fact, the estimate of such benefits exceeds the esti- mated irrigation benefits. This project cannot, therefore, be evaluated in the traditional manner. Juniper project -2-