Upper Colorado Region Comprehensive Framework study : Main report.

UUM_UpperColoMain_page_100

PART VII COMPARISONS AND CONSLUSIONS No alternative levels of damage reduction are included for the statesf alternatives because programs such as oil shale development are planned to include the necessary watershed protection measures as a part of the development cost itself. The increased population under alterna- tive levels and resultant impact on the watershed may increase the cost of accomplishing the planned protection. Adequate data to estimate the costs are not available. Flood control One basic plan has been prepared for flood control. However, flood damage and damage reduction have been evaluated for two alternative levels of development. A comparison of estimated average annual flood damages (1965 prices and project conditions) under the framework plan and the alternative projections, exclusive of "water available at site," follows: Estimated average annual flood damage (thousands of dollars) States• alternative 1965 Framework plan in 2020 acre-feet in 2020 b.16 million acre-feet in 2020 2,792 10,600 10,900 11,900 The flood damage reduction under these alternative levels of devel- opment is shown in Table 23. Economic activity Comparisons of population, employment, gross regional product, and personal income are shown in Table 23. Costs Cost data have previously been presented for water development and associated development programs for the framework plan. Average annual expenditures for water development during the 5-year period 1965-69 were also compiled from agency and state reports. Comparison of these data is shown on the following page. 100