Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br />,. ,I <br />'.J.'., <br />'1'": <br /> <br />FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT AND COLORADO WATER <br /> <br />"" <br />j <br /> <br />Through the Colorado River Storage Project Act of 1956, the Upper <br />Colorado River Basin Fund was created by which costs of storage <br />projects under the act would be repaid. Colorado was to receive 46% of <br />excess revenue, principally hydro-power, from initial units and <br />participating projects. Currently, this is 46% of zero because user <br />charges and power rates are set to create just enough to cover <br />repayment to the Treasury over the specified 50 year repayment plan. <br /> <br />However, after the 50 year repayment cycle, monies credited to the <br />Upper Basin States will be sizable. By the year 2050 Colorado's share <br />could be more than half a billion dollars. <br /> <br />? <br />t' <br /> <br />In 1968, the Congress passed the landmark and very controversial <br />Colorado River Basin Project Act calling for the construction of five <br />major water storage projects in Colorado in tandem with Arizona's CAP. <br /> <br />By 1977, the Carter Administration, with little understanding of <br />Western water considerations, signaled a turnabout in federal water ~ <br />policy that in truth was probably inevitable. Colorado found most of <br />its projects on the "Hit List". <br /> <br />The fundamental tenet of the policy was the states would have to assume <br />new financial and political responsibility for water projects within <br />their borders. Under Carter and later under Reagan, the new watchword <br />in water development would become "cost sharing". <br /> <br />THE COLORADO RIVER: ITS MAINSTEM AND PRINCIPAL COLORADO TRIBUTARIES <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />The principal tributaries flowing through the State of Colorado are the <br />Green, (from Wyoming) and the Yampa, White, Gunnison, Animas, LaPlata, <br />Dolores and San Juan, all originating in Colorado. <br /> <br />Of the 2.85 million acre feet consumptive use to which Colorado is <br />realistically entitled, the state presently depletes 2.17 million acre <br />feet. Thus, Colorado is left with a minimum of 680,000 acre-feet, <br />annually, of free flow entitlement. <br /> <br />f <br /> <br />A look at the map of the entire Colorado River Basin reveals the Lower <br />Basin to be pockmarked with a myriad of major storage dams, diversions, <br />ditches, and tunnels. Colorado's share of the map, by contrast, is <br />equally pockmarked with "proposed" water projects. <br />~ ~ /---------, ') <br />Of the several proposed projects,~Dolor~~allas c~k1 and Rangley, <br />with perhaps 108,000 acre-feet potential conswnptl.on, and Animas-'::La ( <br />Plata, Juniper-Cross Mountain, Yellow Jacket, West Divide and~ <br />Dominguez, with an additional depletion of 637,000 acre-feet, have some <br />prospect of being built. <br /> <br />'. <br /> <br />But, one must balance these speculations with the reality of economics. <br />Proposed projects in Colorado carry estimated costs of over $2 billion <br />in 1980 figures. <br /> <br />- 3 - <br />