OCR Text |
Show 142 PROBLEMS OF IMPERIAL VALLEY AND VICINITY. The remainder of the estimated future development is in small areas which it is assumed will be reclaimed by individual efiForts. Classification of future irrigation. Under existing canals near Grand Junction. <~!Iass A. Class B. Class C. Class X. Grand Valley ............. 46,000 Pumping extension (Government).................. 10,000 All other. • ,.................................. 117,000 Total ................... 46;000 10,000 0 117.000 DIVERSIONS FROM BASIN. These are discussed fully in the part of this report devoted to "Diversions out of Colorado River Basin", p. 173, and are here listed for convenience. Operating diversions. [Not shown on general map.] Name. From. Annual diversion. Grand River.. Church........ Boreas........ ; Ewing Placer. North Fork of Grand. Fraser.j.............. Blue. Eagle. Total. Possible increase by enlargement and betterment. Grand total................................ Acre-feet. 15,000 500 800 2,500 18,800 15,500 34,300 Proposed diversions. Index number on map. Name. From. Annual diversion. Fraser River... Williams Fork. Blue River___ Eagle River... Total. Fraser. Williams Fork. Blue and Ten Mile.. Eagle and Ten Mile. Acre-feet. 110,000 50,000 100,000 40,000 300,000 POWER. Up to the present, horse-power development on this stream is larger than any other part of the entire basin. Doubtless opportunity exists for development at sites at present unknown. Known power possibilities are in Gore Canyon below Kremmling reservoir site and at Dewey, where the flow can be regulated by Dewey reservoir. |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |