|
<br />41
<br />
<br />40
<br />
<br />Differentll.
<br />
<br />~9.8S.,OOO
<br />46.2011,OOQ
<br />23,646,000
<br />
<br />$~8, 109, 000
<br />46,290,000
<br />11,819.000
<br />
<br />tion Districts, or both, if such pUIIlping can be economically
<br />justified, and if by November 1, 1954, tbe board of dIrectors of
<br />these respective districts indicate a desir,e that sucb pump UDlt or
<br />units be Illcluded for study and posSIble IllclUSlOn Wlthlll the scope
<br />of tbe Narrows project."
<br />The preceding conclusions and recommenda.tions were approved and
<br />adopted by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, Tbe Bureau of
<br />Reclamation concurred and initiated the necessa.ry studies.
<br />
<br />Munu.ipal and industrial water 8Upply
<br />During the investigations of the unit, several communities down-
<br />stream irom tbe Narrows Da.m Bite evidenced interest in a reservation
<br />of water for future municipal and industrial needs, No firm commit-
<br />Dlent was made. It appears that the communities have, or ca.n readily
<br />obtain, an ample supply from ground water for all foreseeable ~eedsi
<br />therefore this possibility bas not been incorporated as a functlOn of
<br />the plan' of development, In the unlikely event of urgent need for
<br />mUnIcipal and industrial wa.ter in addition to, or as a repla.cement
<br />for, ground water tbe communities pTobably would bave to a.cqu5!'~
<br />irrigation water. rights.
<br />DEFERRED POTENTIALITIES
<br />
<br />Under date of September I, \954, region 7, Bureau of Reclamation,
<br />transmitted its finul cost estimates on the two resef\~oir sites) along
<br />with supporting data, to the Colorado Water Conservation Board, At
<br />the same time, the consultants, Woodward-Clyde-Sherard & ,Associ-
<br />ates, who had been following the course of the Bureau estrmates,
<br />submitted their report on compartLti\'e cost estimates.
<br />A summary comparison or the cost estimates is as foUmvs:
<br />
<br />Bure.u 0'
<br />Reellmllian
<br />
<br />WOOIll4'lllll.
<br />c!Yt~~~I~rt~~d
<br />
<br />WIIIlCOunty____________
<br />NlrrtlYws .
<br />
<br />The priucipa.l difference between the two estimates is that the con-
<br />sultants recommended u stnlcture at the Weld County site utilizing
<br />--- -a much: .t.hiuner core or im pervious material than the designs prepared
<br />by the Bureau of Reclamation. The chief engineer's office of the
<br />__ Bureau of Reclamation stated that there would be no compromise
<br />with safety; therefore, if a dam were built at the Weld County site
<br />by tbe Bureau of Reclamation it would be built according to the
<br />specifications prepared by the chief engineer. The cost would then
<br />be essentially as estimated,
<br />In 0. memorandum to the Colorado Water Conser\'tltion Board, On
<br />September 4, \964, the director of the board concluded and recom-
<br />mended as rouows:
<br />(a) That to date the Bureau of Reclamation has expended
<br />!,-pproximately $1,500,000 in investigations, et cetera, on the
<br />Narrows project; the State of Colorado hIlS expended approxi-
<br />mately $200,000; nnd local interesis (both for and against) have
<br />expended significant but undetermined sums.
<br />(b) Tha.t {urther site selection investigatio118 would be rruitless.
<br />(c) That the construction of the Narrows project would provide
<br />major economic benefits t.o the people of Colorado for generat.ions
<br />to come.
<br />(d) That if major reservoir storo.ge is constructed on the lower
<br />South Platte River in the for~eea.ble future, it will ha.ve to be
<br />constructed under rccla.ma.t.iou law at the Narrows site.
<br />"It is the staff recommendation that this Board immediately trans-
<br />mit its official comments on the Narrows Unit oC the Missouri River
<br />Basin project to the Secretary of the Interior, requesting that construc-
<br />tion be init~8t.ed as speedily as possible on the Narrows Unit of the
<br />Missouri River Basin pro/'ect, ""rith a dam to be constructed at the
<br />Narrows site in substantia accordance witb the plans contained in the
<br />site selection r~port heret..oCore presented to this Board by region 7 of
<br />the Bureau of Reclamation, with the CoUowing additions:
<br />"A. Tbat tbe project include a pump unit on tbe South Platte
<br />River near Sterling, Colo., for the purpose or increasing tbe project
<br />water supply approximately 32,000 acre-feet annuaUy,
<br />"B. That the project include a pump unit or units near or
<br />adjacent to the N arrows Reservoir, for the purpose of supplying
<br />additional irrigation water to either the Riverside or Bijou Irriga-
<br />
<br />FoUowing elimination of the Weld County Dam site in favor of
<br />the Narrows site in September 1964 the Colorado Water Conserva-
<br />tion Board requested tho.t studies of' the N arrows u~it be ~xpedited.
<br />Tue Board further requested that the Narrows Ulllt ,tud,es be ex-
<br />panded to include: (A) a pump unit on the South Platte RIver near
<br />Sterling, Colo" for the purpose of increasing the project water supply,
<br />and (B) a pump unit or units Dea.r or adjacent to tbe Narrows R~ser-
<br />voir, for tbe purpose of supplying a.dditional irrigat!on water to. eIther
<br />tbe Riverside or Bijou Irrigation Districts, or both, if sucu pUIIlplI!g can
<br />be economically justified, Later, the Board also requested .tudles on
<br />a weU field or pump lift to provide supplemental water to dltc.b
<br />systems in tbe Julesburg a.rea.
<br />Because tbe floods of June 1965 renewed interest in t.be control of
<br />floods from Bijou Creek, n potential channel for diverting Bijou Creek
<br />into the N arrows Reservoir was also studied.
<br />These additional potentialities were studied to reconnaissance
<br />Bta.lldards. None or them are recommended for inclusion as component.s
<br />of tbe Narrows unit at this Lime. They are considered as separo.ble
<br />segments that should be justified incrementally. A brie{ descript.ion
<br />of each potentiAlity foUow:s,
<br />
<br />su,rling plLmpinp plant
<br />
<br />The exisling Norlh Sterling Irrigation Di~tri~t lands are . include?
<br />in the Soutb Platte Water Conservancy DlStncl. The fund claSS1-
<br />flcation survey for the Narrows unit disclosed tbat in 1955 the North
<br />Sterling Irrigation District contained 31,410 acres or irrigated irrignble
<br />land "nd 4,548 acres of class 5W land or 35,058 acres in service, The
<br />diEtrict also contn.ined 14,684 aeres of irrignble dry land.
<br />Aft.er the Narrows unit. is in operation, approximately 3G,GGG
<br />acre-feel, of surplus flows will continue t.o accrl1e to the stream below
<br />Narrow8 Dam. In an effort to provide a lIse for these flows in Colorado,
<br />a study was made of tbe potential Sterling pumping plant, The
<br />
|