WSP06830

• File Number: 8141
• Description: Fryingpan-Arkansas Project
• State: CO
• Basin: Arkansas
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 3/7/1960
• Author: Acting Sec of Interi
• Title: A Report and Findings on Ruedi Dam and Reservoir Colo Pursuant to Federal Reclamation Laws
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

4Q08

58

RULDI DAM AND RESERVOIR, COLO.

The O"re'lte<.::.t flood of a f)3-veal' record on t.lle Hoaring Fork Riyer
WtlS ls,'7no' cU"!Jic feet per se,coiHl <It G:lenwo?d Spl'iI;gS .on .July ~, ID[l7.
A.. retard of similar lennth IS not a-nlllable for the E rymg-pan River.
- The three, counties <.;t- Garticld, Eagle, and Pitkin, which embrace
most. of the lllcalll rea, !lad a l~op';lhltion in 1950 u verugiug :3.1 persons
per ~qual'e mile. The poplllatlOlllIl the o\-erflo\\' are.as ha:; not dUlllged
apvreLiaLly in l'l~('e-llt. years. The 1D50 populatIOns of GI:J1wood
SIJI'ings, Carbonda.le, Basalt, and Aspen were 2,412, +!4, 11::3, and
VIG, respecti\'ely. . "
.A preliminary c.onsideration of maJor snowmelt flo~YS III the Fl'ymg-
pnJl HiveI' and in the lira i nage tll:ea.llf the Colorado R~\'er aho~.e GI:and
Valley indicate that tlle pea.k lhsdul.I'ge n.t the RueJI D,~m Site m~ght
be about 89 percent. of a. contemporary peak on the Fr}lIlgpan RIver
at its mouth; about 48 percent of the corresponding peak on the
Ronrincr Fork River just below the mouth of t.he Fryingpan River;
about 3G percent. of the corresponding peak on the Roaring Fork Hiver
at it.s mouth; and ahout 18 to 15 percent of the cDrresponding peak
on t.he Colorado R.iver betw('en the mouth of t.he Roaring- Fork River
and the mouth of the Gunnison Hi,'er. Complete eontrof of snowmelt
discharges at the Ruedi Reservoir would eliminate all potential flood
damage on the Frying-pan Hi ,.er downstJ'~um. Such control would
substant.ially reduce flood damage on the, Hoa.ring Fork RiVet, below
the mouth of the Fryingpnn River. Percentagewise the damage
caused by Fryin"pan River waters ,dong t.he Colorado River would he
a relatively sma'iI part of the potentia.! d'lInage in that part of t.he
Colorado Ri vel' referred to ",bove.
The overflow aTeas under consideration include 18.5 miles along
the Fryingpan HiveI', 25.7 miles along the Roa.ring Fork Ri,.er, and
about VO miles along the Colorado Riyer. The Fryingpan River is
well entrenched, and the only present, de,"elopment a.Iong" that st.ream
t.hat. is subject to flood dama.ge consists of about 1 mile of 2-lane paved
highway; 2 highway bridges; and about 14 ea.bins, most of which aTe
near the ehannel in or ad,iacent, t.o Basalt. In general, t.he Roaring
Fork River between Basalt. and Carbondale is in a valley a.\"eJ'aging
abont 0.75 mile in width. Below Carbondale, the valley is "'UTower
and the stream is generally deeply entrenehed. Along the Roaring
Fork River, property affected by floods indudes about 2,.500 aeres of
a.gricultura.llmul, de\'oted mostly to pasture; a.bout 13 dwellings with
farm buildings; 7 road bridges; about. 2 miles of railroad; 0.75 mile
of St.ate highway; and 0.75 mile of ot.her roads. The value of lands
and improvements susceptible t.o Hood damage ,dong the Colorado .
River between Glenwood Springs a.nd Grand .Junction has not be"n
definitely estimated. The \"a.]ue of all property in the overflow areas
between Ruedi D:lI~l site on the Fryingpan River a.nd Grand tJunction
on the Colorado River is believed (0 be at least, $1 million and may
reach $.3 million to $fl minion. Very little information is now avail-
able upon whieh to base an estimate of future \"alues in the overflow
a.reas. In general, the de,"elopment in these area.~ seems st:'Lbilized,
and dllmag-es have been estimated on this assumption.
O!! the b:1Sis of a flood damage. sUI"\'ey made after the 1957 flood
(18,.00 culne feet per second at. the Glenwood Springs gage on the
Roarll1g Fork RI\'er), t.he tot.al flood damage along the Fryingpan