My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP04510
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
4001-5000
>
WSP04510
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:55:47 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:24:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.128.J
Description
Silt Project
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
1/1/1951
Author
USDOI - BOR
Title
Silt Project-Colorado - A Supplement to the Colorado River Storage Project Report - Part 2 of 2
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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 />~ <br />~ <br />C'T';) <br /> <br />CHAPTER VIn <br /> <br />J.LI'EftNilTlVE PLilNS <br /> <br />Enlargement of Existing Ditches from Elk Creek <br /> <br />This ,plan involves enlargement of existing ditches diverting from <br />Elk Creek near New Castle. and pumping the water to Harvey Mesa lands. <br />Water available in Elk Creek would be insufficient for project lands, <br />and an ~xpensive canal diverting from the Colorado River near Gl~nwood <br />Springs would be required to supplement the supply. This plan would bEl <br />excessively costly for the benefits received. <br /> <br />Pumping froffi the Col~rado River <br /> <br />Pumping with hydro pumps powered by water from t,he Colorado River <br />was found impracticable because of the high lift and the long, costly <br />divElrsion canal that would be required. <br /> <br />Canal from Main Elk Creek to Harve.v Gap Reservoir <br /> <br />Under this plan the flow of Main Elk Creek would be tapped at a <br />much lower elevation than in the Elk Falls Canal and Power Conduit plan. <br />Water from the creek would be delivered to the Harvey Gap Reservoir <br />which would be enlarged to a capacity of 6,000 acre-feet, Under the <br />plan the Grass Valley Canal would be abandoned Ilnd additional East Rifle <br />Creek water would not be used. The plan would not fully provide for the <br />project area and its cost per acre served would be materially greater <br />than that for the adop te d plan. <br /> <br />Enlargement of Harvey Gap Reservoir <br /> <br />Harvey Gap Reservoir would be enlarged, and an increase would be <br />rmde in the quantity of East Rifle Creek water it would store during <br />winter and early spring. The cost involved, however, is excessive for <br />the water developed and the development would supply water only to <br />those lands on Harvey Mesa. <br /> <br />Storage on East Rifle Creek <br /> <br />Under this plan water would be stored abov," the Grass Valley Canal <br />intake. Reservoir water could be diverted to all project lands elimi- <br />na ting the ne cessity of storing water for replacElment. The en tire <br />watershed of East Rifle Creek was examined, however, and no feasible <br />reservoir sites were found. <br /> <br />f <br /> <br />54 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.