| OCR Text |
Show PROBLEMS OF IMPERIAL VALLEY AND VICINITY. 157 For a short year like 1900, preceded by a shorter year when no holdover is available, conditions would be as follows: Acre-feet. Inflow, October to May, inclusive....................................... 132,000 Diversions by Montezuma project................................. 40,000 Diversions by Dolores project....;...........__..-----.-...........45,000 • oOj UUU Storage June 1....___........................................... 47,000 River discharge June-September, inclusive.'.-.................___60,000 Diversions by Montezuma project.....................................42,009 Balance for Dolores project.......,................................ 18,000 Total for Dolores project_____............................,.. i..... 65« 000 Total per acre, Dolores project...__.......... r....,.......,,.;.-*¦ <...,.. 0.81 While this amount is relatively low, it is, however, sufficient together with precipitation to prevent total crop losses, and considering that such years do not occiw frequently, the project may be expected to develop to this point. Storage.-The relation of storage required to project area Has been outlined. Additional storage, may be available above the Dolores site, though ho data are at hand. The Dolores reservoir, as planned, backs water to the Montezuma project dam, and additional storage by raising the reservoir could be accomplished only atr considerable cost in reconstruction of the diversion system for that project. Lowering the outlet in Dolores reservoir Would increase storage, but would also increase cost for the main canal by lowering the summit grade'of the San Juan divide. Conclusion.-The acreage available for this project is much larger than the water supply will care for and construction will depend wholly on unit costs, as the cost of the main features of the project will vary but little with considerable variation in acreage. Such unfavorable features of this project as its transportation facilities, large initial investment required, and probably high cost per acre will probably deter development for a long time. 93715-S. Doc. 142,67-2-13 |
| 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] : |
