Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. ", . <br />OO~5j5 <br /> <br />financial help to build the canal distribution system as a gift, <br />with the state assuming the pumping costs. Put it up to Congress <br />to determine how the electricity would be generated to do the <br />pumping. These two factors should always be kept together. <br />The state itself and the federal government should work to- <br />gether on how to bring Colorado River water into the state as <br />far as Tucson. Now is no time to go off on a wild goose chase <br />.of 'going it alone.' " <br /> <br />But talk of eliminating one dam or another persisted in <br />the Basin. In Denver the Colorado Water Conservation Board, <br />which was that state's official agency watching over policy in <br />matters involving interstate streams, decided to back away from <br />Marble Canyon Dam and a full-fledged water import feasibility <br />Rtudy. In place of that study, the Interior Department would do <br />merely a preliminary study or reconnaisance. The move was <br />aimed at pacifying conservation groups and the Pacific North- <br />west. The board's director, Felix L. Sparks, said the' concessions <br />were necessary if the Colorado River regional plan was to have <br />any chance of going through in the next Congress. Mr. Sparks <br />. had urged such a compromise in an earlier meeting at Los <br />Angeles of representatives of all seven Basin states. There was <br />no indication that other states in the Basin had yet subscribed <br />to the compromise idea advanced by Colorado. <br /> <br />A Symposium on a State CAP <br /> <br />In mid-December the Arizona Interstate Stream Commis- <br />sion and the Arizona Power Authority held a symposium in <br />Phoenix to discuss ways and means of getting Colorado River <br />water with state financing. Present in addition to officials of <br />the two agencies were representatives of five of the nation's <br />largest investment banking firms. They were Kuhn, Loeb & Co., <br />Dillon, Read & Co., First Boston Corp., Lehman Brothers and <br />Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. The symposium was <br />in fulfillment of an earlier request by Governor Goddard-when <br />it was apparent that CAP had failed in Congress-that a study <br />be made of various go-it-alone approaches. <br /> <br />The symposium considered four different plans: (1) CAP <br />with low dams at Marble and Bridge Canyons: Cost--$828.4 <br />million. (2) CAP with one dam at Bridge: Cost-$716.9 mil- <br />lion. (3) CAP with one dam at Marble Canyon: Cost-$645.4 <br />million. (4) CAP with no dams but a tax subsidy of $6 to $24 <br />million annually. All four approaches would be combined with <br />two pump-back projects, one to be located near Lake Havasu, <br />the other in the Estrella Mountains 20 miles southwest of <br />Phoenix, to be called the Montezuma pump-back project. These <br />would be projects in which water would be lifted with rela- <br />tively inexpensive off-peak power to a reservoir and then <br />allowed to flow back during periods of peak power needs. Thus <br />additional power would be generated, to be sold at a higher <br />price. <br /> <br />-34- <br /> <br /> <br />l <br />