OCR Text |
Show that would have authorized the construction of both projects, had it been enacted into law. The Navajo Indian Irrigation project will be in Northwestern New Mexico along the south side of the San Juan River in the Farmington-Shiprock area. The project will irrigate 110,630 acres of new land on the present or extended Navajo Indian Reservation. Although this project is directly dependent upon the Navajo Storage Unit (currently under construction) of the Colorado River Storage Project, Public Law 485 states that irrigation costs that will be beyond the capability of the Indian irrigators to repay shall be nonreimbursable, and irrigation costs that are within the capability of the lands to repay shall be deferred so long as the lands remain in Indian ownership. The potential San Juan-Chama project is located in Southcentral Colorado and Northcentral New Mexico in the San Juan River, Rio Grande and Canadian River Basins. This project will divert waters from the headwaters of the San Juan River into the Rio Grande Basin for the purpose of providing supplemental water for existing irrigation projects and for municipal and industrial uses in the Albuquerque, New Mexico metropolitan area. Although water for the diversion will be collected from tributaries of the San Juan River in both Colorado and New Mexico, all water will be used in New Mexico in the Rio Grande Basin. By exchange, the project will also increase the use of water in New Mexico in the Canadian River Basin. It is planned to provide for an initial diversion of an average of 110,000 acre-feet of Colorado River Basin water per year. This project will also improve conditions for recreation and fish and wildlife in the Rio Grande Basin. It is expected that authorizing legislation will again be introduced in both houses of the 87th Congress shortly after it convenes in January 1961. c. Animas-La Plata Project (See discussion under Colorado) UTAH a. Gooseberry Project The Bureau of Reclamation completed a feasibility report for this project in January 1953. The plan of that report contemplated a diversion of 11,700 acre-feet from the Price River Basin. The people of Carbon County in the Price River Basin opposed the plan, and, as a result it has not been recommended to Congress for authorization. Comparative data on a revised plan for a smaller diversion was compiled in 1957 for the use of the State of Utah in resolving the controversy between Carbon and Sanpete Counties. In 1958 and 1959 the Bureau investigated possibilities for exchange storage in the Price River 63 |