Laserfiche WebLink
<br />er ... <br /> <br />4832 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />96. BF,NEFITS FROM INCR~~SED LAND UTILIZATION.- Crop production <br />in the Arkansas valley is dependent on irrigation. Expansion of irri- <br />gated agriculture is not possible without provision of additional watcr <br />supply by some means such as interbasin diversions. Although the <br />Fryingpan-Arkansas Proj ect wi 11 make about 6~), 200 acre-feet of ad- <br />ditional watcr available annually, no additional land will be brought <br />under cultivation. The additional supply will be used to firm up sup- <br />plies to arcas already under irrigation. Although some change in crop <br />patterns is expected in the valley, these changes primarily Hill be a <br />consequcnce of the improved Hater supply. In consideration of the <br />foregoing and also thc lesser effect Pueblo P.eservoir will have on flood <br />frequencies do"nstream from Fountain Creek, there would bc no significant <br />benefits to rural dc.velopment from changed land use as a result of in- <br />clusion of flood control storage in the project. Likewise, urban land <br />values Hould reflect little enhancement by the project. The city of <br />Pueblo already enjoys a high degree of protection as "ill Las Animas <br />upon construction of the authorizc.d local protcction project. Furthcr- <br />more, La ,Junta and also Las Ani,nas arc located at t,he 100,cr end of the <br />area that \'Iould sustain flood reduction benefits from the project, <br />Flood frcquencies h'ould not be reduccd in tho's arca sufficiently to <br />exert any measurable influcnce on land values. <br /> <br />97. ,INTAilGIiJLE BEliEFI1"D.- TI1C intangi\>]e benefits which Hould <br />be realized as the result of additional floo~ protection would include <br />prevention of loss of human life, reduction of hazards to health, en- <br />hancement of public security, and prevention of the interruption of <br />normal community activities including business operations. <br /> <br />98. NEGATIVE BENEFITSo- Acquisition of real estate for the proj- <br />ect Hould remove some agricultural land from tax rolls. 1I0wever, these <br />tax losses "ould be offset by the increased tax returns from protected <br />property dOlmstrcam .from the dam. TI)ere Hould also be evaporation <br />losses from stored flood"aters. These losses are an economic cost to <br />be accounted for in determination of total project costs. <br /> <br />SUMMARY <br /> <br />99. SifJ~'IARY.- The annual flood control benefits attributable to <br />operation of Pueblo Reservoir for f]ood control in accordance with plan <br />of regulation prcscrihed in paragraph ~l are estimated at $743,700 based <br />on price levcls prevailing during June 1967 and 93,000 acre-feet of <br />flood storage space. <br /> <br />37 <br />