|
<br />Oi'i??8~
<br />~_...- ~
<br />
<br />-12
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />3. That the Upper Basin can only use between 4,500,000 and 5,000,000
<br />acre-feet ~f water a year out of its allocated 7,500,000 acre-feet a
<br />year without the hold-over storage. above mentioned, required to enable
<br />the Upper Division States to meet compact obligations for delivery of
<br />water at Lee Ferry. Without such hold-over storage, Colorado1s share
<br />of water allocated to the Upper Basin qy the Upper Colorado River Basin
<br />Compact of 1949 would be reduced from between approximately 1.)00,000
<br />and 1,600,000 acre-feet of water a year. The remaining unused water
<br />in the State which may be relied upon for its future development must
<br />not be further limited and res.tricted qy failure or inability arising
<br />from internal controversies, or othenvise, to join in a program which
<br />~dll make its full share of Colorado River vster available to it. It
<br />is important, therefore, that in considering storaee on the Gunnison River
<br />as a part of the Colorado River Storage Project plan that the broad aspects
<br />of future vster development in the State be considered in cormection \vith
<br />local and area factors.
<br />
<br />'.'
<br />
<br />4. That adequate storace in the Upper Gunnison iliver Basin is
<br />necessary for stream flavr regulation in order to secure the full benefits
<br />from the storage in the proposed 1:lhitewater Reservoir site, Accordingly,
<br />sufficient storage in the Upper Gunnison River BaSin, through initial
<br />authorization and const~~ction, should be provided in advance of the
<br />proposed Whitewater storage,
<br />
<br />5. That it is estirr.ated the storage requirements in the Upper
<br />Gunnison Basin for beneficial consumptive use of water for domest~c,
<br />agricultural and industrial purposes will amount to approximately
<br />425,000 acre-feet. This includes estimated storage of 95,000 acre-feet
<br />for synthetic fuel processing. This latter storage requirement is based
<br />on the results of studies and surveys, made available to the Committee,
<br />which have not yet been released to the public.
<br />
<br />'1
<br />
<br />6. That, of the five alternative Gunnison River Storage plans,
<br />(Plans B to F inclusive), set forth in the report and study submitted
<br />by the Bureau of Reclamation in its report of January 24, 1952 to the
<br />Committee (attached hereto as Appendix H, mentioned above), the only
<br />plan which meets the policies and criteria approved by the Committee
<br />is Plan E,
<br />
<br />.'
<br />
<br />Plan A, described as to total storage and active storage on Page 1
<br />of the Bureau's report is the same set forth in the Colorado River
<br />Storage Project Report for the Gunnison River and is as follm7s:
<br />
<br />Total Storar;e
<br />
<br />Active Storage
<br />
<br />?roject plan)
<br />2,010,000 A.F,.
<br />o A,F.
<br />470,000 A.F.
<br />2,480,000 A.F~_
<br />
<br />Plan A
<br />
<br />(Same as the
<br />Curecanti.
<br />Crystal
<br />r.'hitewater
<br />
<br />Colorado River Storage
<br />2,500,000 A.F,
<br />40,000 A,F,
<br />880,000 A,F.
<br />3,420,000 A,F.
<br />
|