My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06210
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06210
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:21:46 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:30:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8221.110
Description
Juniper-Cross Mountain Project
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Date
4/19/1978
Title
News Articles/Press Releases: 1978-1983
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
News Article/Press Release
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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 />\ h~ D"-.'f\\J"-f (~o::;,-t <br />'S~f't 1,1'131. <br /> <br />'Superficial appeal' of dam project under'attack./'(~~\'ll' <br /> <br />rr: <br />~. <br />1"- <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />,." .11,e Denver Post: <br />LEE OLSON'S editorial page column <br />'11 the slow pace of Western water reo <br />"urcc development gives the impression <br />hat the time has come for the Juniper. <br />'ross Mountain project. According to Mr. <br />Jlson, the only obstacles in its way are <br />Cl)ublesome federal review and permilling <br />)ro~cdurcs anu quarrelsome cnvironmcn.. <br />. :llists. He would have the reader believe <br />'hat the project is an attractive investment <br />'..:cause private financing is available and <br />)ccause peaking power facilities com- <br />,willI a premium price for their product. <br />Mr. Olson's conclusions depend .on <br />,ho's doing the books and paying the <br />,ills. Conventional resource development <br />"rojects are notorious for ignoring a wide <br />,ange of costs and, as a consequence. <br />.1iscounting what would otherwise be at- <br /> <br />tractive. but less conventional, alterna- <br />tives. Juniper-Cross Mountain is no ex- <br />ception. <br />. For example, evaporation from the res- <br />ervoir surfaces is expected to be 63.000 <br />acre-feet annually. Givcn this loss of wa- <br />ter, salt concentrations (the most serious <br />pollutant in the Colorado) downstream <br />might be expccted to increase by 5 milli- <br />grams/liter (mgll). (Not included in this <br />figure is the potential of salt leaching from <br />Mancos shales which will be inundated by <br />the reservoirs.) <br />Recent Bureau of Reclamation calcula- <br />tions on the salinity problem in the Colo- <br />rado basin suggest annual damalles caused <br />by the project would be $2.5 nullion. De- <br />pending on the interest rate one chooses, <br />this figure translates into a present values <br />cost of $25 million to $30 million. Tacking <br /> <br />this item onto the dams' price tag of $160 <br />million increases overall costs by 20 per- <br />cent. Such an eventuality would make the <br />projcct must less attractive. <br />This is only one example of a tangible <br />cost which doesn't appear on the books. If <br />one were to look at other spillover effects <br />the price would go evcn higher. The value <br />of the river and the surrounding lands <br />cannot be ignored, particularly in a river <br />system that already has more storage per <br />unit of flow than any other in North <br />America. <br />Juniper-Cross Mountain is a project <br />from the past. The public can't afford to <br />support the faulty accounting that may <br />give it a superficial appeal. <br />DANIEL F. LUECKE <br /> <br />Environmental Defense Fund <br /> <br />Denver <br /> <br />. ~.':5':..,.i( _.~Ij\~g~. _..._."",. <br />.....~u., IV IIt,",l 1I,-,(1U UJ n.CIIUl"l, Ui~O~.:I'yCl <br /> <br />~~#. <br /> <br />TI~~.~::Pff~e~ping t~~B~~r.~!~ee of dams. -n>P ~;;1) <br /> <br />. W w co umn, The Time Lag SpeCIfically excluded from this b.1l and share the feelings of Escalante Powell <br />:~eme~s;~rge later Pr?lects," Lee Olson Split Mountain and Echo Park dam; onw~~~ the Kolb Brothers and others as 'they ex: <br />I f Id h. te ling the envlronmentahsts" Green and Y ampa Rivers within D. plored one of the greatest rivers in the world <br />o 0 t elf tents and steal away for there. N. I mosaur I. I . . <br />no stoppino a dam . . 1 ' IS atlOna Monument. Also authorized was a tIS a so Important to recognize that these <br />lUan Junip~r-Cros~ I~~~~:~in ap~~ee~~rgan. study C!f the feasibility of constructing a dam wonderfld natural values of the Yampa .now <br />posed to impound the Yamp Ri ~ pro- at Jumper Canyon, the site of one of the coeXlst With a vital economy in Northwestern <br />Olson shouldn'l mislead a~ ver. . presently proposed reservoirs. Colorado, a~d can continue to do so forever. ., <br />that the Outcry over lhis latesi~f::n~n~eheve Jumrer Dam ~as never built by the Bu- ~oweve~li this latest proposal would destroy <br />abandoned proposals to dam the Yam :~ili reau 0 Reclaf!1atlO!" presumably because it t at equl bnum. . <br />not be swift and substantial p could nol be Justified econormcally. Subse- We should not make haste to despoil this <br />I At the turn of the cent~ry. the Colorado ~uent congressIOnal action authorized other grand nver - to do so would only expose <br />River system had no major dams B 1936 ams - Morrow Pomt, Cryslal, Dolores, the our collective short-Sightedness. <br />Roosevelt and Hoover dams am~ng ~thers' Cent~I'fulah Proj~ct - >yhich will inundate Instead, let us savor it now, and forever if <br />were completed and began t~ ut the C I' or m I y many nules of nver. we nught, so that if true need someday forces <br />rado and its tributarie.; 10 J>ork gro~~ f Today, development has left only a small us to wnte an end to the Yampa, we will at <br />crops and producing electricity g ractlOn of the Colorad? River system in least be able 10 say that we felt its magic for a <br />In 1956 the Colorado R.. S more-or-less nalural conditIOn. tIme. <br />p . Iver torage Certainly the mosl s t If' <br />. rOj~ct Act was passed by Congress, aUlhor- . . h Y . pec aeu ar 0 that BEN HARDING <br />!Ling construction of Glen Canyon, Flaming , f:~i~~el~~r~ p~~r:~~~s g~a~~o~~d~~~t~~~ Boulder Consulting Engineer <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.