Water Log: Citizens for a Responsible CUP (newsletter)

Page 7

of currently existing irrigation works will develop low cost water by stopping the 15 to 207. transportation loss associated with current irrigation distribution. Construction funding should go ahead on the Jordan Aquaduct, the reservoired lakes in the Uinta Mountains, the rehabilitation or full piping of the canals in the Uinta Basin, the Wasatch Aquaduct and the full enclosure of the Provo Reservoir canal. Unfortunately the appropriations request before you contains little money for these vital distribution facilities which can bring us an immediate return for our water investment dollar. Instead the Bureau has chosen to request funding for the most questionable pieces of the project. • The age of the Central Utah Project is showing and the inflexibility of the project has drawn criticism from important and well regarded resource experts in the state. The Governor of Utah recently sponsored a series of symposia around . the state to inform Utahn's about Utah's water problems. The keynote speaker Professor Jay Bagley commented on the inflexibility of the current design as a stifling influence on local water planning. Discussing state sponsored initiatives Professor 3agley said: " These imaginative schemes represented a range of alternative! to, and adaptations with, features of the Central Utah Project as scoped by the Bureau of Reclamation. The principal objective was to generate some overall plan which could encourage the kind of balanced investment needed to achieve a more balanced distribution of water. Although these alternate large scale schemes were never carried beyond a preliminary stage, they emphasized possibilities for more effective use of locally available supplies, better utilization of groundwater and a kind of integration of various water projects and facilities to provide better flexibility in distributing water on a regional basis. "The fact that these new schemes represented some departures from the CUP pattern posed some sticky political problems which legislated against their serious consideration. There was concern that any appearance of inconsisency or change in position by the state with regard to the already authorized elements of the CUP could lead to a loss of Congressional support for continued funding. Utah had always taken a stance that the early developement of water entitlements to the Colorado ".*. River was of primary concern. Embracing options which indicated a diminishing of that priority could not only weaken influence for Congressional appropriations but could eliminate sources of federal money in the assignment of Colorado River power revenues and construction dollars for developement within that basin. Thus there was insufficient political enthusiasm to carry out these state derived options to a definite plan stage. "Having looked at these grand possibilities and finding them politically unfeasible, the state has continued its acceptance and endorsement of the CUP and has Dursued a strategy of more localized palnning". I believe Congress should understand the effect of the CUP in choking off technically feasible, cheaper solutions to our water supply problems in Utah to the increasing dismay of local taxpayers who must repay the cost in property . taxes. I do not mean to say that the CUP is all bad. The budget for this year contains some worthy features which should be funded. Specifically: the Jordan Aquaduct should be funded, Soldier Creek and Currant Creek dams should be finished, rehabilitation of the Duchesne River area canal system should be funded. But some features should not be funded. These include: Construction of Upper Stillwater dam,Jordanelle dam and reservoir, Hayes dam, and Goshen Bay and Beer Creek dikes. - ~~ * " ... In conclusion I must also quote from a 1972 study which involved extensive computer analysis of the water resources of the Jordan River Basin. This study was completed by the- Utah Water Research Laboratory at Logan Utah. I quote from the concluding paragraph: " It is concluded that there is sufficient water within the • Jordan River Basin to satisfy M&I needs through at least 1990 if not to 2010 (depending on how fast M&I demand grows) even if irrigation diversions were maintained at 1965 levels. Additional inter-basin transfers are not an economical source of water now or in the foreseeable future. Both transfers from irrigation and page 7