My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07841
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07841
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:29:07 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:37:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.127
Description
Savery-Pot Hook Project
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
1/1/1976
Title
Report on the Planning Coordinating Council Review of the Savery-Pot Hook Project & related Correspondence
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />-=:l" <br />~ <br />00 <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />:~1 <br />, ;,.',31 <br />Jarncs Monaghan <br />January 17. 1977 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />inefficiency of the project, but they repay only about one <br />third of that for water. Put another way, we are spending <br />$100 million to confer $33 million in benefits, with the. <br />beneficiaries themselves repaying only about a third of that. <br /> <br />(3) The project is not likely to forestall energy develop- <br />ment in the area. Perhaps the BuRec and the irrigators can <br />be prevented from selling project water to industry, although <br />the mechanism for preventing such sales does not now exist. <br />However, I do not see how they Cdn be prevented from selling <br />their current water rights, which are of just about the same <br />magnitude as the project water, and would be ample to supply <br />the mining development currently proposed. <br /> <br />These conclusions, and others which point in the same direction, <br />were the outcome of a three day exercise in which I developed a <br />probability tree analysis of conceivable outcomes of building or not <br />building Savery-Pothook. Four reasonably likely outcomes emerged <br />and, of them all, the project as conceived by BuRec weighed out as <br />inferior on every value scale I could devise except the one of <br />giving almost total emphasis to the economic position of one hundred <br />ranchers. I'll be happy to explain that analysis to you or to anyone <br />else interested in Savery-Pothoo~. It would be interesting to repeat <br />it for Dallas Creek, Fruitland Mesa, and Dolores, as well as the three <br />projects yet to be funded. <br /> <br />I'm sending a copy of this letter to Harris, as well as to you. <br />If I were asked to summarize, I'd say we've been taken in by an <br />elaborate system of special interest politics, and that no amount <br />of talking about past commitments or about current jeopardy of federal <br />funds or scarce water can hide the fact; I feel very badly that I <br />wasn't able or willing to say so during the PCC review. <br /> <br />Sincerely yours, <br /> <br />~A <br /> <br />William B. Lord <br /> <br />WL/gl <br /> <br />cc: Harris Sherman <br /> <br />,'. <br /> <br />!'/: <br /> <br />j' <br /> <br />-,'-',,' <br />+. <br />. " <br /> <br />,'. <br />.' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.