My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP05142
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
5001-6000
>
WSP05142
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:17:09 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:53:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.101.17
Description
Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powell
State
AZ
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
8/20/1972
Title
Draft of Reply to Paper by Dr. James R. Guadagno
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.
/
18
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 />QIf <br /> <br />The value to the Upper Basin States he places upon it, $10,000,000 (for 180,000 <br /> <br />acre-feet $6,300,000), therefore, seems somewhat illusory--especially when <br /> <br />one considers that the Upper Basin will be losing the consumptive use of 1.1 <br /> <br />million acre-feet of water annually. <br /> <br />"If we were to use the same value for water used by the doctor, $35 per <br /> <br />acre-foot per year, and his method of calculation, here are about $ 31.5 million <br /> <br />dollars per year worth of benefits to the Upper Basin States in the corpus of the <br /> <br />water alone (after excluding that evaporated) which he Ignored. In addition are <br /> <br />net losses of millions of dollars in power revenues lost annually from the lower <br /> <br />power head, and hundreds of millions of dollars pumped Into the economy of the <br /> <br />nation through agrIcultural, industrial, recreational enterprises made possible by <br /> <br />the available water. It appears clear that the good doctor eIther misrepresented, <br /> <br />or has no concept of, the purpose of the large storage reservoIrs In the Upper <br /> <br />Colorado River Basin. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />(3) It is beyond comprehension how It can be contended that wIth a total <br /> <br />loss of 1.1 millIon acre-feet of possible consumptIve use of water In the Upper <br /> <br />Basin with Lake Powell limited to elevation 3600 feet, the prevention of the evapor- <br /> <br />ation of 180,000 acre-feet of water that would be unavailable anyhow, would provIde <br /> <br />more water for Upper Basin projects. Further, due to the erratic seasonal and annual <br /> <br />fluctuations of the Colorado RIver, oblIgations to the lower basin require the oper- <br /> <br />ation of the reservoir to full capacity. Again, the refusa I of Dr. Guadagno to <br /> <br />recognize thc prImary long-term, holdover functIon of Lake Powell sccms evIdent. <br /> <br />(4) Dr. Guadagno persists in expressing the theme that "if the level <br /> <br />of Lake Powell were kept at 3600 feet, the feasibilIty of future projects would be <br /> <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.