My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP02419
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP02419
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:36:42 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:06:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.127.I
Description
Savery-Pot Hook Project
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
10/30/1976
Title
Public Hearing on the Draft Environmental Statement Savery-Pot Hook Project
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
EIS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />m <br />(':) <br />~ <br /> <br /> 11 <br /> 12 <br />".... 13 <br /> 14 <br /> 15 <br /> 16 <br /> 17 <br /> 18 <br /> 19 <br /> 20 <br /> 21 <br /> 22 <br /> 23 <br /> 24 <br /> 25 <br /> <br />34 <br /> <br />1 the proceedings this afternoon. We called the name of Winston <br /> <br />~!;! <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />Boyer this morning to testify and he was not present at the time <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />that his name was called. He since has arrived and so he will <br /> <br />4 be our first witness this afternoon. Mr. Winston Boyer, <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />MR. BOYER: How do you do. Now, I'm a member of a <br /> <br />6 family that has a ranch just above the Sandstone Savery Dam site. <br /> <br />7 I'm sure I would like to say that I'm sure the Boyers would not <br /> <br />8 stand in the way of this project if it were economic or even a <br /> <br />9 break-even situation. It would be sad to lose our ranch, but <br /> <br />10 we are pretty broad-minded people when it comes to the common <br /> <br />good. I would like to say, can anyone here imagine spending <br /> <br />eighty ~illion dollars to reirrigate 14,670 acres of new land an <br /> <br /> <br />not feel a little embarrassed in sponsoring such a project? The <br /> <br />economic facts, for example, on the Savery Sandstone Dam will <br /> <br />probably cost thirty million or more. The new ground irrigated <br /> <br />will come to 6.000 acres. They have 6,590 acres and I'm sure <br /> <br />they are being a little overoptimistic in this. This is putting <br /> <br />a value of $5,000.00 per acre on ground that has a value now of <br /> <br />$200.00 or less, or probably much less. Imagine spending $5.000.00 <br /> <br />an acre on ground in a cold country where production is probably <br /> <br />twenty-five percent of a warmer, lower area. It's equivalent <br /> <br />to spending $20,000.00 an acre in a real productive area. In <br /> <br />my opinion. and I believe the Bureau of Reclamation has no right <br /> <br />to throw people's taxes around in non-economic projects. And to <br /> <br />make matters worse they are spending deficit money that rolls <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.