Laserfiche WebLink
<br />IRE"U\ND, STAPLETON, ~Rl'OR oS. HOLMES <br />PROF'"ESSIONAL CORPORAT10f':'! <br /> <br />0216 <br /> <br />Mr. Harris D. Sherman. <br />January 26, 1976 <br />Page, -12- <br /> <br />flood reaches the main stem could help reduce or even control <br /> <br />adverse effects of Bijou flooding. The District disbursed <br /> <br />more than $530,000 for damages to irrigation works alone <br />. <br /> <br />as a result of the 1965 combined Bijou and South Platte <br /> <br />floods" It is reasonable to believe this amount would have <br /> <br />been less had the Narrows been in place. <br /> <br />Finally, it should be noted that the savings, <br /> <br />as suggested on the second page of the presentation by Weldon <br /> <br />Valley landowners, of not including flood control in any on- <br /> <br />stream dam, are minimal. Only three additional feet of dam <br /> <br />are necessary to add this important benefit to the project <br /> <br />and the cost of having a spillway to pass floods if they are <br /> <br />not controlled would be substantial. <br /> <br />It should be noted that <br /> <br />reducing the size of the Weld County site dam would require <br /> <br />a huge and very expensive spillway. <br /> <br />9. Questionable Irrigation Benefits. <br /> <br />A principal argument appears to be that more lands <br /> <br /> <br />can b~ served at the Weld County site than at the Narrows <br /> <br />site. <br /> <br />In fact, the Riverside and Bijou irrigation systems <br /> <br />have been invited to participate in the project and to share <br /> <br />in the project water supply. Both systems have declined <br /> <br />although a nunilier of individual landowners under the Bijou <br /> <br />system have joined the District. <br />