Laserfiche WebLink
<br />0222 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1. Cost-Benefit Ratio - Interest and Extensions <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />We people of the Regional Landowners Group are not against progress; <br /> <br /> <br />however. we feel the cost-benefit ratio of the Narrows Project is so far <br /> <br /> <br />out of proportion that a few of the fallacies should be pointed out in <br /> <br /> <br />this regard. <br /> <br /> <br />We also believe that what is needed is a total river plan rather <br /> <br /> <br />than one large dam located too far downstream to benefit but a small pro- <br /> <br /> <br />portion of our whole South Platte River Basin. <br /> <br /> <br />If one takes the time to check out the cost-benefit ratio of past <br /> <br /> <br />projects, it must be noted that true cost-benefit ratios are an average <br /> <br /> <br />of about I/J of the cost-benefit ratio stated at the time construction <br /> <br /> <br />was initiated. <br /> <br /> <br />The construction costs on the Narrows Project have gone from about <br /> <br /> <br />$46,000,000 in 1964 to the latest figure released by the Bureau of Recla- <br /> <br /> <br />mation of $139,025,000 with a cost-benefit ratio of 1.40 to 1. This figure, <br /> <br /> <br />based on averages of past projects, will have to be at least tripled to <br /> <br /> <br />actually construct the Narrows Project. We would like to point out that <br /> <br /> <br />the true cost-benefit ratio of the Narrows Project would be far below the <br /> <br /> <br />present figure of 1.40 to somewhere close to .50. <br /> <br /> <br />In quoting facts from DAMMING THE WEST, cost-benefit ratios alone <br /> <br /> <br />are used in determining whether a project passes the test of economic <br /> <br /> <br />feasibility. <br /> <br /> <br />All projects with ratios of less than 1.5 are rejected by the Office <br /> <br /> <br />of Management and Budget. <br /> <br />. <br />