Laserfiche WebLink
<br />0233 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />8a. Non-existent Flood Control Benefits <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The gross majority of the flood damage sustained during flooding <br />has been done in the Denver area. News accounts in local newspapers and <br />statements released by Logan County officials verify that there was "no <br />material damage" done in their area which lies below the proposed Narrows <br /> <br /> <br />project. Sinoe the flood on the South Platte River of 1973. the Chatfield <br /> <br /> <br />Dam has been completed and another major structure is now under construc- <br /> <br /> <br />tion on Bear Creek. Had either of these structures been completed, they <br /> <br /> <br />could have contained floods six times the size of the 1965 flood. There <br /> <br /> <br />is no way that the Bureau of Reclamation can begin to defend the FLOOD <br /> <br /> <br />CONTROL COSTS. The actual flood control costs should be materially de- <br /> <br /> <br />creasedl A structure of the size and costs involved in a project such <br /> <br /> <br />as the Narrows is without reason. <br /> <br /> <br />The group of people that we represent are not against dams or other <br /> <br /> <br />structural control on the South Platte River. However, we are dedicated <br /> <br /> <br />to seeing that such controls are put in the most valuable places so that <br /> <br /> <br />the monies spent will benefit the most people possible. We feel that <br /> <br /> <br />smaller structures costi~ less money and tributary storage should be <br /> <br /> <br />considered. It is our feeling that smaller structures will do much more <br /> <br /> <br />in controlling the run-off flow and stabilization of the South Platte <br /> <br /> <br />River. The further upstream this storage and control is executed, the <br /> <br /> <br />larger the number of people who will benefit from it. <br /> <br />. <br />