Laserfiche WebLink
<br />":.'':~> <br />-';~:7.':~': . <br /> <br />a <br /> <br />" ; <br /> <br />'""'" <br />W <br />~) <br />~ <br /> <br />~'- <br /> <br />-2- <br /> <br />I/i tll respect to th-e -dfsr-osition-of -the- waters-of--the- Caddoa- reser-voir_if__and _when__ ,-- <br />to <br />it is constructed, in I<hich event the a8reement isrbecome a stipulation in the <br /> <br />pending case between Colorado and Kansas over the uses of the water of the <br /> <br />Arkansas river. <br /> <br />For the above reasons another complete study has been made of the Caddoa <br /> <br />reservoir. This study brin~s the former investi?ation up to date Ilith respect to <br /> <br />water supply; determines the benefit to be derived by the individual Colol'"do <br /> <br />canals from the reservoir; determines the value of the reservoir from an economic <br /> <br />standpoint; takes into consideration the terms of the tentative Kansas-Colorado <br /> <br />a~reement with respect to the allocation of benefits from the reservoir to the <br /> <br />two states; and in the asswned operation of the reservoir, reco~~izes fully <br /> <br />Colorado irri~ation laws and administrative procedure. <br /> <br />'i'he follo'"in,,: discussion "'i ves the conclusions of the study, tOfether with <br /> <br />a brief description of the methods used to arrive at those conclusions. Several <br /> <br />voluminous detailed tables of water supply, reservoir operation, and crop <br /> <br />statistics are not attached, but are available for inspection. This also is true <br /> <br />of several ,":rapr.s showinp; canal and reservoir operations and crop statistics <br /> <br />plotted aC',ainst V1!'lter supply. A list of such tables and "raphs is "iven at the <br /> <br />end of the report. <br /> <br />It must be understood that certain assumptions were made as to irrication <br /> <br />requirements within the area to be served by the reservoir in order to arrive at <br /> <br />s lo~ical demand for supplemental ~ater. The canals mi~ht operate differently <br />than assumed if the reservoir were constructed. However, this would not <br /> <br />n;aterially affect the conclusions as to the amount of supplemental water made <br /> <br />available by the reservoir. Also, the benefits derived by the Colorado canals <br /> <br />from the reservoir could be distributed 'on a different basis than that assumed, <br /> <br />providing the aggregate did not exceed the total benefit as arrived at in this <br /> <br />studyc <br />