Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-5- <br /> <br />~.;.':"'._l <br />: ..-". ~': <br /> <br />where the water supply is no ~reater than in the area under discussion, but <br /> <br />r~ where it is controlled, the average eross crop value per year is practically <br />_.> <br /> <br />, ) <br /> <br />.... double that in 3ent and I'rov,ers counties. If the reservoir were constructed, <br />~ <br />(,\1 it is believed that there '"ould be a chanr;e in the type of crop raised. If <br />~ <br />such a chanc'e materialized to the extent that the S!lllle type of crops were raised <br /> <br />in Bent and Pro~~rs counties as in Weld county, it is concluded the ~ross crop <br /> <br />values would be increased about ~600,OOO a year for a period such as 1914 to <br /> <br />1936. <br /> <br />5. The annual cost of the reservoir ,rould depend upon the repayment <br /> <br />period and rate of interest. Based on a thirty-year repayment period and 4% <br /> <br />interest rate and )25,000 for annual operation and maintenance, the annual cost <br /> <br />during the period of repayment "'ould be :)314, 150 or about '~2. 55 per acre-foot <br /> <br />of avera~e annual benefit besed on such a period as 1914 to 1936. If the <br /> <br />repayment period were the same and the interest rate were 6%, the total annual <br /> <br />cost would be about ~388,250 or about)3.15 per acre-foot of benefit based on <br /> <br />such a period as 1914 to 1936. <br /> <br />6. The following indicates the disposition of the flood water which <br /> <br />flowed past the site of the reservoir from 1914 to 1936, inclusive, under the <br /> <br />assumed 'operation of the reservoir. <br />