WSP06677 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I&-Montrose Daily Press~Thunday. May 11. 1978 / ~ ".~\":'.:;, .,~r'>_ ~ . . "",'~l';-'''''F'~'' <.. . ., ,~';:' , ;;~~"y.. .~., y..:, -'!~ <,'j ';.,."~:":',:;.,.-;:lt~~~,,, ~",'., ., ',__!:~.... J' . I.T;:,;"".'s.~;:J/!'''''-.''>'''$~.''''r~' );,l;".l-~_~f;.;.. ~~.':" .~tc :-1.... . (4;~-j ,;.,.,q;."'.,__:,;~:,,~'Y~_v_,~ '':",'i'f;-.i-:, -~"-<' ~~F\ t . ".'.,-;'.'"' '-,~"_i:~~JH... ,: . "~': 'X.'i',.!,.....::;"~..':'... .;:t "l- ." ,... ~ i.' , ... ' . ,';lI . "..1p..il:lt,..ji,n~', ~/.' ,...t""'~' ",if"":K' '~.1.~~',',,;., ,,,:-:-.;..,~.:>.<; /' I \,t'.t.{;;,)t..~-', .:!~<~.:'>~' -"~"'.\' .r..."" ~,~". 1~~"~"lU:..... _ ..' ','_j.:..\.~.,. AUGER TRUCK DIGS A TEST HOLE atthe Ridgway Dam .~ ~ site, (Bureau 01 Reclamation photo hy Vern Jetley), . ..Project changes during planning (Conlinuedfrom Pagt' 15) elevation vallcyslike the up- per Uncompahgre B.-.sin be<'ause thl'cash value of cr'Jps proouced per a('~ is comparatively low. This problem was largl'ly alleviated for Dallas Creek in ]956 when Congress passed the Colorado River Storage- Proje-ct Act. One of the features of this i:let was to provide money from power re-venues from CRSP facIlities, such as Blue :v!esa and Morrow Point D..ms, to assist designated participating irrigation pro- jects in their repayment. The Dallas Creek Project WllS designated as one of these participa1ing projects It was given priority for [ei:lsibility studies and could now depend on financial iJ~sistance for repayment if authorized by Congress. Local Support In September. 1957, theTri- County Water Conservancy \}htrict was fonned as a sponsoring agency for water development projects. From its inception it has supported and sponsored the lli:llli:lsCreek Project. It will be the contracting ugenc~' between the United Swtes and the water users uJlon completion of project tonstruction. Tri-County has always recommended the inclusion of municipal and industrial W;Jter provisions in the pro- jcclpli:ln In anticipation of the Dallas Creek Project, Tri- County has recently con. structed a piped domestic water system intheUncom- pahgre Basin and has arrang. ed for an interim water supp- ly until the project can be completed. Feasibility Report After the Dallas Creek Pro- ject was designated as a CRSP pa rtitipating project. funds became available for concentrated feasibility in. vestigations of the project Detailedlandclassification surveys were conducted to identify specific lands suitable for irrigation. Budget analyses of representative fanns in the area were run to detennine the ability of agriculture in the upper Uncompabgre Basin to support and pay for an irrigation project. Hydrological studies- were made to determine presen1 water use and the exact capability of the basin streams. As a result of these studies a plan was developed by the Bureau, witb the help of Tri- County Water Conservancy District This was essentially a refinement of the 1951recon- naissanee plan, and it was published in a feasibility report in 1966. Municipal water was in- cluded in the plan rorthefirst time. The plan presented in the Dallas Creek Project Feasibility Report would have developed a total water supply of 75.300 acre.feetan- nually, including 60,300 acre- feet lor irrigation and 15.000 acre-feet for municipal use. An irrigation supply of54.- 300 acre-feet a year would have served 14,690 acres of full senrice land on lAJg Hill MesaandZlOacresoffullser- vice land between East and West Forks of Dallas Creek. Also 960 acres in the lAJg HHI Mesa area would have received 800 acre-feet of supplemental irrigation water annually. The remaining 5.200 acre. fee-tof irrigation wa~r woutd have been used for supplemental irrigation of 7,760 acres in the Colona and Dallas Creek areas. The 15,000 acre-feet of municipal waterwasplanned for Montrose, Olathe, Delta, and the surrounding rural areas in the Uncompahgre Valley. The plan would have resulted in flood control and improved waterquality in the UncompahgareRiver. In this plan, three reser. voirs would have been con- structed in the uppe-rreaches of the project area to store projeetwater. They would have been Ridgway Reservoir with a capacity of 146,500 acre.feet on the Uncompahgre River and Dallas Creek, Dallas Divide Reservoir with a capadtyofI7,600acre--feeton Pleasant Valley Creek, and Releases from the reser- Sneva Reservoir with a voir also would have been capacity of 825 acre-feet i:lt a used for irrigation and site offstream from Cow municipal and industrial pur- Creek. poses in Uncompahgre Each reservoir would have Valley. been supplied at least part of Dallas Divide Reservoir on its water supply by a feeder Pleasant Valley Creek would canal from nearby streams have stored water from the and each would in turn have creek as well as wate-r from supplied one or more dis. the East i:lnd West Forks of tribution canals Dallas Creek conveyed to the Thehydrau1icallyoperated reservoir by the DalJas Ridgway Pumping Pli:lnt Feeder Canal. would have been constructed Some of the project water below Ridgway Reservoiron from the reservoir would the Uncompahgre River to have been released to Plea- lift irrigation water to Log sant Valley Creek for subse- Hill Mesa where it would quent diversion by the Plea- have been distributed by sant Valley Canal. and the McKenz.Ie CanaL to project remainder would have been lands. diverted at the reservoir out- Ridgway Reservoir would let inw the lAJg Hill Mesa have been formed by a dam Canal. on the Uncompahgare Rivrr Waterdiver1edintotheLog and by adikeonDallasCreek Hill Mesa C..lIlal would have upstream from the creek's been conveyed northeast to confluence with the river serve lands on Log Hill Mesa The reservoir would have in- above the McKenzie Canal. undated the town of Ridgway. The potential Sneva Reser- - voir would have been located It woul.d have ston~o water at a site oHstream from Cow of Dallas Cre~k and the Un. Creek about 5 miles east of compahgre River as well as Ridgway and would have water from Cow Creek that been provided water by the would have ~een conveyed to existing Sneva Ditch which the reservoir by a feeder diverts from Cow Creek. canal from Cow Creek Water from the reservoir Releases from the reser- would have been conveyed by voir would have been ulllized the potential Sneva OUtlet to drive turhines at a pum- Canal to Dry Creek to have ping plant below the dam been distributed to project which would have pumpeO lands by existing ditches projeet irrigation water to diverting from the creek. the lower portion of Log Hill Specific facilities would Mesa via the McKenzie have heen prOVided for Canal reC'feCltlOn and fish and wildlife Recreational facilities would have been provided at each of the three project reservoirs. Specific measures rOT fish and wildlife would have in- cluded acqUisition of public access easements along the Uncompahgre River, con- trol of nongame fish in stre<lms tributary to Ridgway Reservoir, develop- ment of a game management area, and development of a waterfowl production area at Ridgway Resenroir. This plan was the basis for Congressional authorization of the project in 1968 by the Colorado River Basin Act. Reservoir Location Advance planning studies indicated that the site propos- ed for Ridgway Reservoir in the feasibility report and at the time of authorization was not geologically satisfactory. Portions of the glacial moraine are highly perviOllS and bedrock is more than 290 feet below the river bed. Because of the geological problems and to aVQid the in. undation of the town of Ridgway, this site was re- jected. After intensive geologic and engineering in- vestigations tbedam site was moved downstream toa point just below the mouth of Alkali Creek. This is its present location. As time !fent ..?n_,i~ also (Contin\<ed on Page 18)