|
<br />..L -~ o...J...)
<br />
<br />Undeveloped
<br />Streamflows
<br />
<br />Undeveloped stream flows were esti-
<br />mated at various points on the main-
<br />slem South Platte River between the
<br />Waterton and Jules burg gaging sta-
<br />tions. These estimates were based
<br />on available data including U.S.
<br />Geological Survey streamflow rec-
<br />ords, historical river call data provided
<br />by the Colorado State Engineer's
<br />office, and studies by the U,S. Bureau
<br />of Reclamation. The points selected
<br />for estimation were the U,S. Geo-
<br />logical Survey's gaging stations al
<br />Waterton, Denver, Henderson, Ker-
<br />sey, Weldona. Balzac and Julesburg,
<br />
<br />Future Anticipated
<br />Undeveloped
<br />Streamflows
<br />
<br /> 170. ~
<br /> ''"
<br /> ".
<br /> J~O.
<br /> 'W,
<br /> 170.
<br /> n.
<br /> JOO_ -
<br /> '"
<br /> 780.
<br /> n.
<br /> ".
<br /> ".
<br /> ".
<br /> 2JO_
<br /> n.
<br /> ". 0
<br /> 200, 1
<br /> 190. 0 ~
<br /> ... .
<br /> ,1ll_ ! Ii
<br /> ,~ ! ~
<br /> 150.
<br /> I~O, F.
<br /> ',31). -
<br /> ". .
<br /> 110. ,-
<br /> ~ :
<br /> w. . -.
<br /> " ~ Ii
<br /> '", i ~
<br /> ",
<br />~ '", . ~
<br />. '", ~
<br />~
<br />" 00, ~
<br />. " I
<br />o!!
<br />f '", I~
<br />0 1ll,
<br />. . JII, III-E IV,
<br /> I, ",
<br /> Mleraallve
<br />
<br />Evaluation Criteria
<br />
<br />Each of the water resources develop-
<br />ment alternatives examined in this
<br />study could be expected to produce a
<br />set of changes in the natural and
<br />social environment unique from those
<br />which would occur were the alterna-
<br />tive not implemented. Those pro-
<br />spective changes are referred to as
<br />project effects.
<br />
<br />Evaluation criteria for describing
<br />project effects in this investigalion
<br />have been established, These criteria
<br />are of two general categories. mone-
<br />tary and non-monetary, Monetary
<br />criteria are those which are expressed
<br />in dollars because the effects with
<br />which they deal concern goods and
<br />services which are bought and sold,
<br />An example of such effects include
<br />increases in the production and sale
<br />of agricultural commodities.
<br />
<br />Non-monetary criteria are those
<br />which are not expressed in dollars
<br />because the kinds of effects with
<br />which they are concerned do not
<br />directly involve marketed goods and
<br />services. Non-monetary criteria are
<br />described in the report in terms of
<br />the net change from present condi-
<br />tions. Water quality. for example, is
<br />described in terms of changes in
<br />chemical concentrations, Fish and
<br />wildlife would be described as loss
<br />of habital (in acres), or increase in
<br />species composition or number of
<br />species.
<br />
<br />Three monetary criteria and two
<br />non-monetary criteria have been se-
<br />lected for this assessment study. The
<br />monetary criteria are investment
<br />cost. net economic benefit. and ben-
<br />efit-cost ratio. The non-monetary
<br />criteria are water quality impacts
<br />and fish and wildlife impacts,
<br />
<br />Formulation of
<br />Alternatives
<br />
<br />Based upon existing plans for and
<br />information about water resources
<br />development in the South Platte River
<br />Basin as proposed by various federal
<br />and state agencies, municipalities,
<br />and water user associations, a set of
<br />generalized alternatives for water
<br />resources development within the
<br />South Platte River Basin was identi-
<br />fied and analyzed,
<br />
<br />Six general kinds or categories of
<br />water resources projects were for-
<br />mulated for this study, They are: [AI
<br />new storage facilities, on-channel,
<br />[B) new storage facilities, off-chan-
<br />nel. (C) management changes of ex-
<br />isting facilities, (D) expansion of
<br />existing facililies, (El transbasin
<br />exports. and [F) conjunctive surface
<br />water/ground waterstorage and use.
<br />
<br />The potential for developing addi-
<br />tional water with anyone of these 6
<br />kinds of projects was analyzed in
<br />each of four situalions. They were
<br />the development of upstream main-
<br />stem flows. downstream mainstem
<br />flows, the flows of mountain tribu-
<br />taries,and the flows of plains tribu-
<br />taries,
<br />
<br />1 I
<br />
|