Col
n ·partnwnt of So ·iolo~y Fort Collitl~. Cnlnrndo H052J- 17H·I
W t r Dis r· L #42, #72, #73 bd #74
1 s C unly, ENGINEERING REPORT FORMER WATER DISTRICT 42 NOW WATER DISTRICTS 42, 72, 73 & 74 MESA COUNTY, COLORADO THE FEDERAL LAND BANK OF WI CHIT A
Date: September 18, 1980
MEMO TO: President Wallace Wagner, FLBA of Grand Junction IJ 564
FROM: Dexter G. Henderson, Engineer Apprais~
SUBJECT: REVISION OF WATER DISTRICT 42-72 REPORT
Attached is a revised report on the Grand.Valley Irrigation Company in former Water District 42 - now Water District 72. This ditch company is revised to show the water delivery history since the report of 1970, and to reflect the Class C stock issued to replace the former Fruita Canal and Land Company shares. This report should replace the same pages in the water book on Water District 42 Revisions.
Also included is a revised index page to reflect the changes.
We have not received the ACCO fasteners with the 7% inch hole spacing for the small sized engineering reports as yet, but will send you some when and if we get them.
Let us know if you have any questions •
.. "'
THE FEDERAL LAND BANK OF WICHITA
Date: July 28, 197 5
MEMO TO: Manager, Association ifo564 - Grand Junction
FROM: Engineer Appraiser
SUBJECT: WATER DISTRICT 42 REVISIONS
Attached is a report book containing a tabulation of all decrees and revisions of ditch systems made to date in former Water District 42 - now Water Districts 42, 72, 73 & 74.
This revision covers all systems diverting from the Colorado River, and the pages are numbered and indexed through the Colorado River tab. Any revision of ditch systems diverting from the Gunnison River, Kannah Creek or Plateau Creek are filed alphabetically behind the tab for each drainage area.
This report should include all the revisions covered in the folder for revisions in Water District 42 you no'tv have in your office. I would appreciate your checking the book you now have against this new book to see that everything is included, and returning the book you now have to this office to be updated for future use.
I had a very good two week trip to Color&do in June, and got a number of ditch revisions taken care of that had been pending for some time.
Dexter G. Henderson Engineer Appraiser
DGH:js
attach.
cc: Dan·rin Asper --:rl
I N D E X
Former Water District 42 Now Water Districts 42, 72, 73, 74 Mesa County, Colorado
Revisions and Supplements
Ditch or Item Date Revised Page General Summary 6-1975 1 - 9 Tabulation of all Decrees 6-1975 10-65
Colorado River - Main Stream
Tabulation of Decrees from Colorado River 66-67 Map of Main Project Area 68
Arbogast Pump Plant No. 1 6-1975 116 Arbogast Pump Plant No. 2 6-1975 116 Arbogast Pump Plant No. 3 6-1975 116
Bluestone Ditch Association 6-1975 86-89
Cameo Irrigation Ditch & 1-1970 113 Pumping Plant
DeBeque and ru1one Ditch 1-1970 113
East Palisade Irrig~tion District 1..:..1970 .., .:.. 90
Goffredi Pipe Line - Pump Station 6-1975 116-117 Grand Valley Irrigation Company 8-1980 69-72 Incorporated Laterals Appleton Lateral Ditch Co. 1-1970 73 Enterprise Ditch Co. 6-1975 73 Grand Valley Irrig. Co.-Class C 8-1980 74 Hawkeye Lateral Ditch Co~tock 6-1975 74-75 Lorna Ditch and Lateral Co. 1-1970 75 Pamona Lateral Ditch Assn. 1-1970 76 Grand Valley l-.Tater Users Assn. 1-1970 103-111 Grand Valley Project - U.S.B.R. Grand Junction Drainage Dist. 1-1970 118
Hurlburt Ditch 6-1975 114
Kinney Ditch 6-1975 114
' Larkin Irrigation Company 6-197.5 77-80 L. H. Hurt Pump 6-1975 115
Mann Pumping Station 1-1970 112 McCall Pumping Plant 6-1975 115 Mesa County Irrigation Dist. 1-1970 91-95
Orchard Mesa Irrigation Dist. 1-1970 96-102 Orchard Mesa Powe+ Canal l-1970 112
Palisade Drainage District 1-1970 119 Palisade Irrigation District 1-1970 81-85 . '\
lliDEX - Cont.
Gunnison River and Tributaries
Ditch or Item Date Revised Tabulation of Decrees
Redlands Water & Power Company 12-5-1946
Kannah Creek Watershed
Grand Mesa Res.ervoir Company 7-1972 Grand Mesa Reservoirs No; 1, 6, 8 & 9
Scales Reservoirs No. 1 & 3
Plateau Creek
Collbran Conservancy District 6-1961 Collbran Project - U.S.B.R. I N D E X
Former Water District 42 Now Water Districts 42, 72, 73, 74 Mesa County, Colorado
Revisions and Supplements
Ditch or Item Date Revised Page General Summary 6-1975 1 - 9 Tabulation of all Decrees 6-1975 10-65
Colorado River - Main Stream
Tabulation of Decrees from Colorado River 66-67 Map of Main Project Area 68
Arbogast Pump Plant No. 1 6-1975 116 Arbogast Pump Plant No. 2 6-1975 116 Arbogast Pump Plant No. 3 6-1975 116
Bluestone Ditch Association 6-1975 86-89
Cameo Irrigation Ditch & 1-1970 113 Pumping Plant
DeBeque and Rhone Ditch 1-1970 113
· East Palisade Irrigation District 1-1970 90
Goffredi Pipe Line - Pump Station 6-1975 116-117 Grand Valley Irrigation Company 8-1980 69-72 Incorporated Laterals Appleton Lateral Ditch Co. 1-1970 73 Enterprise Ditch Co. 6-1975 73 Grand Valley Irrig. Co.-Class C 8-1980 74 . Stock Hawkeye Lateral D1tch Co. 6-1975 74-75 Lorna Ditch and Lateral Co. 1-1970 75 Pamona Lateral Ditch Assn. 1-1970 76 Grand Valley Water Users Assn. 1-1970 103-111 Grand Valley Project - U.S.B.R. Grand Junction Drainage Dist. 1-1970 118
Hurlburt Ditch 6-1975 114
Kinney Ditch 6-1975 114
Larkin Irrigation Company 6-1975 77-80 L. H. Hurt Pump 6-1975 115
Mann Pumping Station 1-1970 112 McCall Pumping Plant 6-1975 115 Mesa County Irrigation Dist. 1-1970 91-95
Orchard Mesa Irrigation Dist. 1-1970 96-102 Orchard Mesa Power Canal 1-1970 112
Palisade Drainage District 1-1970 119 Palisade Irrigation District 1-1970 81-85 INDEX - Cont.
Gunnison River and Tributaries
Ditch or Item Date Revised
Tabulation of Decrees
Redlands Water & Power Company 12-5-1946
Kannah Creek Watershed
Grand Mesa Reservoir Company 7-1972
Grand Mesa Reservoirs No; 1, 6, 8 & 9
Scales Reservoirs No. 1 & 3
Plateau Creek
Collbran Conservancy District 6-1961
Collbran Project - U.S.B.R. TO: Wm. S. May, Vice President, Federal Land Bank of Wichita
SUBJECT: Engineering Report - Lower Colorado River - Water District 42
Mesa County, Colorado
Grand Valley Irrigation Company
Grand Valley Water Users Assn.
Mesa County Irrigation District
Orchard Mesa Irrigation District
Palisade Irrigation District
Grand Junction Drainage District
Palisade Drainage District
The report on the above projects dated___ J_a_n_u_a_r""'"y_l_9 .... 7_0 ______contain recommended appraisal and loan standards to be observed by appraisers in the area covered. It is submitted herewith for approval.
,J-i$-7(.) {date) November 1, 1961
MEMORANDUM TO: Appraisers and Managers in W.D. 42, Mesa County, Colorado
FROM Dexter G. Henderson, Engineer Appraiser
SUBJECT Tabulation of Decrees granted in W.D. 42, Mesa County, Colorado
Attached·is an alphabetical tabulation of all water decrees granted in Colorado Water District 42, Mesa County, Colorado, including all domestic and conditional decrees.
This list is intended as a supplement to the General Report on the area made on November 15, 1937. No attempt has been made to classify each water right at this time.
The General Adjudication of July 25, 1941, renumbered all decrees granted prior to this date giving consecutive numbers to all decrees on a District basis - replacing the stream-numbering system formerly used. The renumbered order is used herein with the former stream number added in parenthesis. This decree also awarded a 'blanket' decree under Priority No. 610 as supplemental water to some 87 ditches for a total of 170 cfs with a priority date of November 1, 1939.
The General Adjudication of July 21, 1959, is unusual in that it assigned both an appropriation date and a decree date in each case. The decree covers priority numbers 609 to 951. Priority numbers 738 to 951 were given the same date for appropriation and decree dates.
This tabulation should be of some assistance in determining water rights where the applicant offers an interest in a ditch, but does not know the priorities held by the ditch.
Enclosure 1
ENGINEERING REPORT
FORMER WATER DISTRICT 42 NOW WATER DISTRICTS 42, 72, 73 & 74 MESA COUN1Y, COLORADO
The area covered by this report includes all of former Water District 42 located entirely within Mesa County, Colorado. The area was divi ded into Water Districts 42, 72, 73 & 74 for purposes of administration in 1971. The areas included in each new district are shown on the following map of Water Divisions and Water Districts in Colorado.
Water District 72 now covers the area drained by the Colorado River from DeBeque to the Colorado-Utah state line, and Plateau Creek which drains the eastern or upper end of the district consisting of the north slope of Grand Mesa and the south slope of Battlement Mesa.
Water District 42 now includes the Gunnison River from the point where it enters the county line 22 miles southeast of Grand Junction, and the Kannah Creek drainage area which heads on Grand Mesa and enters the Gunnison River from the east.
New Water District 73 covers the drainage area of the Dolores River within the county, while the new Water District 74 covers the small drainage area of Coates Creek along the Colorado-Utah line.
All of former Water District 42 was included in Irrigation Division 4 with headquarters in Montrose, Colorado. Under the present administration set-up Water District 72 is included in Irrigation Division 5 with an office in Glenwood Springs, Colorado, and Water Districts 42, 73 and 74 are administered in Division 4 from Montrose.
The area covers approximately 2400 square miles. It is irregular in shape with a maximum length east and west of 84 miles and a maximum width north and south of 54 miles. The Colorado River which ent,ers just south of DeBeque and flows in a somewhat meandering course in a southwesterly direction for a distance of 65 miles is the principal river. The Gunnison River which enters at the county line and flows northwest to converge with the Colorado River just south of Grand Junction is the next in importance. N DI STRICTS 1971 COLORADO . _I
I tt ~ 41 ,.. 1\ • i I , __ _:~ ;_·-~ - i I .0:
:-~:-66 .- ~ l __ .. L---·- · -··--- --·~ - ~·_: ____ .!_~. l H 0
l A IGATIO DI VISIO 90UNDAAI ES - WATER DIST ICT OVNDARU:a STATE Of COLORADO COU TY OUNOARlE.I 01 510 S A WA E 0 S RIC S 3
History
Mesa County was part of the area claimed and held by the Ute Indians prior to the treaty of 1881, through which they were granted the Uintah Reservation. In 1853, Captain Gunnison led an expedition down the Gunnison River, following the stream past its junction with the Grand River and on into Utah but no concerted effort was made by the whites to develop the area until after its evacuation by the Indians. In the winter of 1881 and summer of 1882, four ditches were constructed on Kannah Creek and during the following winter and spring five more ditches were built in this vicinity and two in the Plateau Valley. In 1884 and 1885 there were twenty-seven additional ditches put into operation on various small streams of the area. Rapid agricultural development followed in the next three years and more than sixty new ditches were constructed. In 1888 the Grand Valley Canal on the Colorado (Grand) River was started, marking the first development along that stream. The first irrigation reservoir was constructed in 1890.
There was considerable irrigation development all through the next decade and by the end of the century most of the present day ditches had been constructed with the exception of the larger enterprises along the Colorado River requiring elaborate diversion works and canal systems. The area has shown steady growth and improvement over the years.
Climate
In the lower valleys and on the lower mesa lands bordering them, the dis tinctive climatic feature is the comparative uniformity of weather conditions from day to day. This is due to the fact that high mountains virtually surround the area and storms pass over the Continental Divide either to the north or to the south, thus eliminating the sudden changes that attend the passing of a low pressure area and severe cold waves so common on the eastern slope of the mountains are rare. There is a tendency for a high pressure area to form and remain practically stationary for days at a time in the winter season.
Temperatures range from a mean annual temperature of 52.7 degrees at Palisade and Grand Junction to probably 37 degrees at the higher levels. The mean annual temperature at Collbran, which is typical of the mountain ranch areas, is 45.8 degrees. Owing probably to the heavier snowfall it is cooler on the average at high levels in this section than at like elevations and latitudes on the eastern slope. The temperatures in the lower valleys during the growing season often exceed 100 degrees while the night temperatures depend largely upon the topography and resultant air drainage, rather than upon actual elevation. The mildest weather in cold spells is found where night winds are the strongest and it is this movement of air down the Colorado River Valley during the night which keeps the Palisade section comparatively free from late killi~g frosts and has led to the development of the fruit industry. 4
This district is characterized by a large amount of sunshine, expecially during the summer months, low relative humidity which averages less than 25 percent on summer afternoons, and light wind movement. The wind blows from the west or toward the mountains in the afternoon and after sunset subsides. Toward morning a light breeze from the mountains springs up and continues until late after noon. At high elevations the prevailing winds are from the west and are frequently very strong in winter and spring.
The precipitation varies in general with the altitude and ranges from 8.29 inches at Grand Junction to 40 inches at the east end of Grand Mesa on the head of Plateau Creek. At Collbran, elevation 6000 feet, which is representative of the mountain ranch areas, the annual precipitation is 16 inches. The monthly distribution of rainfall is comparatively uniform throughout the year in the agricultural areas.
Snowfall in the valleys is very light and remains on the ground but a short time. With increasing elevations the depth increases rapidly. At Grand Junction the annual snowfall is but 22 inches, at Collbran it is 76 inches and at the summit of Grand Mesa it exceeds 200 inches.
The growing season in the agricultural areas, except for a limited acreage of high mountain ranches, varies from 190 days at Grand Junction to 128 days at Collbran. It is interesting to note that at Palisade, which is higher in elevation than Grand Junction, the average length of growing season is 178 days, while at Fruita, which is lower than Grand Junction, the season is 154 days. This is no doubt due to air drainage in the upper valley. The growing season on some of the high mountain ranches does not exceed 100 days. 5 CLIMATOGRAPHY
I t I : '
I . _; ______···------L------
. i
. ;···I I 0.75 0 I 0.57 0.58, 0.57'
Annual - 8.29 inches
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. • Oct. No~. Dec.
I i ·- - .. ·- . -- ·-- ·-· ...... j
Temperature (78 years·of re¢ord) .80 75.5 71.3 72.2 67.8
60. 55.0 .i -, - ~ !U) . ) le·~ : b040 41.5 ~-,! 3.8 .• 8------~r----- .. ------·-··I
I I
,,..~~ ::;:) ~ 26.0 ,..as ~ . ~2Q __ --~- t-·. - ·-- . -Av.erage Annual--52. 5°F I . , . I ~ · !Average Fro~t_ Fre~ PeriQd - April 16 to Oqtober 23 ~ I G.l i I . I bOe . f, ..J -· t - • ~ ~-
1 ,1~..a. n_ ·~ ·. fF_eb.• · ·.·Ma~.- · Apr· •.· 1A · :s · · t 1o · I ~ i u~. 1 ep • ;ct. 1 .. - . ---;- - ·-- . .. -- ~ ·: "] . . : . 1
...______.__!~---~~.1±-~~J-~~~ 6
Adjudication Proceedings
Dates of the various water adjudication proceedings of the District Court of Mesa County are:
July 25, 1888 - Kannah Creek Feb. 7, 1890- General Adjudication Oct. 10, 1893 - Tenderfoot Creek-Supplemental to Feb. 7, 1890 Oct. 15, 1895 - Mesa Creek Oct. 24, 1896 - Mesa Creek Mar. 19, 1898 - Coon Creek May 2, 1901 - Little Dolores River Oct. 14, 1905 - Plateau Creek and Tributaries Apr. 25, 1907 - Smalley Creek Mar. 16, 1909 - Wallace Creek Jan. 4, 1911 - Wallace Creek Nov. 11, 1911 - Kannah Creek July 22, 1912 - General Adjudication Mar. 23, 1912 - Indian Creek Dec. 16, 1912 - Little Creek Oct. 27, 1915- Colorado River June 1, 1916 - General Adjudication Mar. 22, 1918 - Wallace Creek Jan. 9, 1919 - Rapid Creek Feb. 14, 1919 - Rapid Creek Aug. 18, 1919 - Little Dolores River Dec. 15, 1919 - Kimball and Mesa Creeks Aug. 16, 1920 - Bull Creek Reservoirs Aug. 17, 1920- Snipes Gulch Oct. 19, 1920 - Waste water May 26, 1927 - Springs and Seepage Aug. 3, 1934 - Brush Creek July 25, 1941 - General Adjudication July 21, 1959 - General Adjudication
These dates do not include decrees for change in point of diversion. In the general adjudication of February 7, 1890, many conditional decrees were granted. MOst of these were amended by the decree of June 1, 1916 to conform with the actual irrigated acreage. The court requirement generally stipulated in this district is upon the basis of 0.72 second feet for 40 acres. This has been varied somewhat, however, to meet local conditions and in the general adjudication of June 1, 1916, several dif ferent water requirements were set up. On the Little Dolores River the court in most instances set the water requirement as one statutory inch per acre. 7
The following definition of water supply classifications as given in the Handbook for Engineer Appraisers dated 3-1-1960:
Class I - Water supplies which are normally sufficient to support practically maximum production of the most profitable crops for which the land is adaptable, on the full acreage that is feasible under usual crop rotation practices; such supplies may have slight shortages in occasional years but no material shortages at any time; they normally provide 95 percent of a fully-effective supply or more.
Class II - Water supplies which are normally sufficient to support production of the most profitable crops for which the land is adaptable but with some curtailment in the acreage devoted to those crops, or in the yields either of those crops or of crops raised in rotation with them; in relation to a fully-effective supply, such supplies are subject to moderate shortages in years of normal supply and may have material shortages occasionally in years of subnormal supply; they normally pro vide from two-thirds to 95 percent of a fully-effective supply.
Class III- Water supplies which are normally insufficient to support production of the most profitable crops for which the land is adaptable, or will support such crops only on a very limited acreage or with greatly curtailed yields, but are normally sufficient to support profitable pro duction of crops with lower-water requirements; in relation to a fully effective supply, such supplies are materially short during the irri gation season in years of normal supply and may have critical shortages in years of subnormal supply; they normally provide from one-fourth to two-thirds of a fully-effective supply.
Class IV - Water supplies which are normally insufficient to support production of the irrigated crops for which the land is adaptable al though in some years they may increase somewhat the yields of dryland crops; such supplies usually are available for not more than a very short period during the irrigation season in years of normal supply and only in the non-irrigation season, if at all, in years of subnormal supply; they normally provide less than one-fourth of a fully-effective supply.
The "most profitable crops for which the land is adaptable" are those that normally are raised under existing climatic conditions where a fully-effective supply is available. In the lower altitudes they may consist of such crops as corn, sugar beets, or potatoes in rotation with hay and grain, while in the high-mountain areas the most profitable crop may be clearly limited to meadow hay plus aftermath pasture. Where there may be a question as to the crops that can be profitably produced under prevailing cltmatic conditions, the crops,upon which the classi fication is based are stated.
A "fully-effective supply" is one that provides sufficient water to permit maximum utilization of the land. In classifying supplies that are not fully effective, only that part of the available seasonal supply that can be beneficially used is considered, even though excessive amounts are delivered during the part of the irrigation season. 8
In estimating the amount of effective supply, some carry-over in effect from months of excessive deliveries to succeeding months of inadequate deliveries usually is allowed, the amount of such carry-over being dependent on the circumstances ·Of the particular case. Where meadow hay is the most profitable crop, a fully-effective supply provides ample water to produce not only a full hay crop but also to support late-season pasture and new seedings.
In classifying supplies as II or III for which classes the ranges are rather wide, the position within the class is shown. A supply within the upper third of one of these classes is designated as IIa or Ilia; within the middle third as Ilb or IIIb; and within the lower third as lie or IIIc. If the information available does not permit classifying a supply within one of these classes with that much accuracy, it is designated as Ilb or I!Ib which is average for the class. The limits of the classes and of the subdivisions of the classes, with respect to percentages of a fully-effective supply, are not rigidly adhered to if it is evident that a supply which falls near one of those limits properly should be placed in the next category to be consistent with the classi fications of other supplies.
Basis of Classification
On rivers and streams where water shortages normally occur, water supplies are classified in general according to their probable period of avail ability and effective headgate diversions. The following general limits are used in determining the water supply classifications in lower-valley areas.
Normal Classifications
Class Acre-feet 2er Acre % of Full SuEely Dais Run I 3.20 or more 95 or more Over 120 IIa 2.85 - 3.20 59 to 95 105-120 lib 2.50 - 2.85 78 to 89 95-105 IIc 2.15 - 2.50 67 to 78 80- 95 Ilia 1.78- 2.15 56 to 67 65- 80 IIIb 1.15 - 1.78 36 to 56 45- 65 I!Ic 0.71 - 1.15 25 to 36 30- 45 IV Less than 0.71 Less than 25 Less than 30
In addition to the above requirement schedule, it seems reasonable to establish a second set of conditions to apply to classifications in high-mountain valleys, and on higher mesas Where increased rainfall, lower-mean temperatures and shorter growing seasons combine to reduce the requirement necessary to mature the type of crops adapted to such conditions. With this approach in mind, a mountain-ranch classification has been used in several engineering reports over the years and applies to many of the ditches in Water District 72 - particularly in the Plateau Creek drainage. 9
Mountain Ranch Classifications
Class Acre-feet Eer Acre % of Full SUEElY Days Run I 2.50 or more 95 or more Over 90 IIa 2.25 - 2.50 89 to 95 85 - 90 lib 1.95 - 2.25 78 to 89 80 - 85 lie 1.68 - 1.95 67 to 78 75 - 80 Ilia 1.40 - 1.68 56 to 67 55 - 75 IIIb 0.90 - 1.40 36 to 56 40 - 55 IIIc 0.62 - 0.90 25 to 36 30 - 40 IV Less than 0.62 Less than 30
Many of these limits cannot be established with any degree of accuracy due to the lack of complete diversion records. It then becomes largely a question of judgment based on location of the ditch on the stream, amount and number of priorities granted, condition of the ditch, crops being produced, etc.
Several of the larger canal systems on the Colorado River have historically diverted more water than is indicated by the supply classification ranges established for valley lands. As a result, much of the area served by these systems has become seeped and required artifical drainage to maintain a high degree of production. Drainage districts have been organized and the situation is generally under control.
Discussion of Ditches and Reservoirs
Preparation of this report has been spread over several years with limited progress as time permitted. For purposes of clarity, the report has been divided into several sections or drainage areas. First included is a general summary of the district with a complete alphabetical tabulation of all decrees granted through the general adjudication of 7-21-1959. This tabulation is followed by a section covering all decrees and ditch enterprises diverting from the Colorado River - main stream. The report is believed to be complete through this section and the pages are numbered and indexed.
Revisions under the tabs for the Gunnison River, Kannah Creek Watershed, and Plateau Creek and tributaries are included in alphabetical order behind each section divider. Additions will be made to these sections as time and need permits.
6-1975 ·66
WATER DISTRICT NO. 42 DITCHES AND PRIORITIES GRANTED FROM GRAND (COLORADO) RIVER-MAIN STREAM
District Appropriation Amount Decree Ditch Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Use
Grand Valley Canal 179(1) 8-22-1882 520.81 7-22-1912 Irr. 358 4-26-1914 119.47 7-25-1941 358c 4-26-1914 75.86 7-25-1941 Cond. 1 8-22-1882 300.00 7-25-1941 Dom.
Larkin Ditch 180(2) 4-1-1888 25.00 7-22-1912 Irr. 14 4-1-1888 10.40 7-25-1941 Dom.
Orchard Mesa Power Canal 181(3) 3-6-1889 110.70 7-22-1912 Irr. & Pow. 188(6) 8-2-1898 139.30 7-22-1912 Irr. & Pow.
Palisade Irr. Dist. Irrig. 183(4) 10-1-1889 573.00 7-22-1912 Irr. Pow. Pow. Canal Palisade Irr. Dist. 183(4) 10-1-1889 80.00 7-22-1912 Irr. Distributing Canal 506 6-1-1918 23.50 7-25-1941
Bluestone Valley Ditch 186(5) 1-1-1895 39.11 7-22-1912 Irr. 366 5-1-1914 16.89 7-25-1941 31 1-1-1895 25.00 7-25-1941 Dom.
East Palisade Irr. Dist. 192(7) 10-1-1900 10.20 7-22-1912 Irr. Ditch
Mesa County Irrig. Dist. 193(8) 7-6-1903 627.00 7-22-1912 Irr. Pow. Power Canal Mesa County Irrig. Dist. 193(8) 7-6-1903 40.00 7-22-1912 Irr. Dist. Canal
Mann Pumping System 194(9) 9-10-1903 1.00 7-22-1912 Irr.
Orchard Mesa Irrig. Dist. 197(9A) 10-25-1907 195.00 7-22-1912 Irr. Pow. System 197(9A) 10-25-1907 75.00 7-22-1912 Irr. 197 10-25-1907 130.00 7-25-1941 Irr. Pow. 197 10-25-1907 50.00 7-25-1941 Irr. 360A 4-28-1914 100.00 7-25-1941
Grand Valley Project 198(10) 2-27-1908 Not Fixed 7-22-1912 Irr. 198 2-27-1908 730.00 7-25-1941 Final 40 2-27-1908 220.00 7-25-1941 Dom. 41 2-27-.1908 400.00 7-25-1941 Comm. Power Irr. Period 41 2-27-1908 800.00 7-25-1941 Comm. Power Non-Irr. Period
Cameo Irr. & Plant 199(11) 3-1-1908 o. 78 7-22-1912 Irr. b/
DITCHES AND PRIORITIES GRANTED FROM GRAND (COLORADO) RIVER-MAIN STREAM (cant)
District Appropriation Amount Decree Ditch Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Use
DeBeque & Rhone Ditch 200(12) 7-1-1910 Not Fixed 7-22-1912 Irr.
Rose Point Power Canal 201(13) 7-2-1910 110.00 7-22-1912 Irr. Pow. 201 7-2-1910 3 .. 25 7-22-1912 Irr.
Hurlburt Ditch 374 5-15-1914 1.56 7-25-1941
Kinney Ditch 375 5-16-1914 2.73 7-25-1941
Holly Sugar Corp. Pipeline 631 7-1-1908 10.00 7-21-1959 Industry
DeBeque Water Works Pipe 638 6-15-1912 0.46 7-21-1959 Mun. Line & Pump Station 898C 5-25-1952 2.54 7-21-1959 Mun. Cond.
Grand Junction, Colo. River 787C 2-17-1947 120.00 7-21-1959 Mun. Cond. Pipeline
Hurt, L. H., Pump 790 3-17-1947 2.00 7-21-1959 790C 3-17-1947 2.00 7-21-1959 Cond.
McCall Pumping Plant 806 7-26-1948 0.97 7-21-1959
Arbogast Pump Plant No. 1 832 7-1-1950 4.00 7-21-1959
Arbogast Pump Plant No. 2 833 7-1-1950 2.25 7-21-1959 833C 7-1-1950 0.75 7-21-1959 Cond.
Arbogast Pump Plant No. 3 834 7-1-1950 3.00 7-21-1959
Goffredi Pipe Line-Pump 865 7-1-1951 0.29 7-21-1959 Final 3-11-{ Station 865 7-1-1951 0.47 7-21-1959 Cond. 1'1-136
; ; 6 ------7 L oc at ion of r l·C or d s __Q.9Jil..P,!i.P__y __Q.fJj_~~--~J: __ §.!)JL.:-__ f_§_I;_Q __Rd •------8 ------G~~LU1C!JLODL __ fll5DJL ______9 Ovcrlaps ___ ]iQtUa ______~ ; .·;. I • : •• 1
i ,..: .. 10 ------II . ~ ' '
8 Appra i sa I & Loal"' Stand ==-======:======;:;=::.:.:.:.:=:;;.:..::.;=::;::;::-=::::::.:==:==.;;;=~=-===.:;:_~:;..;;:::.:::.:.~,;.~=-~;.:_.:;.. __ ...;,;:._ . ..:...;.;_:...;._.·~--;_~:;:.~=.:..;.::. C Des c r i p t i on of Sc r v 1 cc Arc a E I r ..- . 4 6 0 0 ~; r; • ._; . • 1 r .• ~ t - t: c c Pc ··eel"'~ ~(r~cnt 176 :-April-24 ~_Q_.J)_c._t_gp~~--1~= I Cro.QS or l ~~('I r ~~ • ;:r ~ c I ;·1: : :,_ " : ,.; f If I 1 1 •·- 8.. ,• .3 •~ ·---. -· i r, , 2 3 .Alialli======--.,_CQ_~l:)_.§c__ in.Ul.~&.«L------======- -======~------======1====3o-=____ 25- Ap.til__tg__O_c.t_, ___\lYg, __ 5_ ,J§ i_nL __ 4 ~JJ[i~t~-~itJl~SL------___ 20 __ _ iopo_:;.!.l't t I n?~ey_e_l __tQ __ ~l9.RiP_g ____ _ B.a.t.t.om....and.J2m~_lang_.__t~w _!i_~ep s6 _Sm~~-~JliD~------_Q;_chiU(Q ______------±---~------~--- washe.s_inJle s..t. _1._/_'b.______··- __ 7 ..MiJic..~______10 _ Ori\ i nage~_teDl_Q_t__Qp_g_Q.JII!l_ins __ 8 St:1te-county t<~x ratcs------emptying__int_o __ n_Sl_tY~Al. __~~F_QY.!lJ~ 9 Cornmun i ty dcve I opment_.iJ;_geng_:~_§.l_:l:y_ _gQOd_!_l!~- i~.p_~QVin_& __ _ p.r.QY.id~Ji-p_y_g_~!- .J.\H~~~io~ __Q _J>Jst. 1 o _tb..x_gy_gh__l_iru;Ll_~B-liP~-qi!lin.u~i-!?-~-~-!t-ou~_inB__ __ So1 Is t. proa.Jc t 11< d)!til]._i_~g§_ _!i_i __ ~_! 1m 1 I -~o.n.a.t.xu~.o..n., __e_t.~t..------.tQ._cl_.luLntb__ S.9~e_Jt an_qy __l!_;~-~s • I 2 ------Gpo erall.y_ _p.rQdUC t iY.e •--- ____ ------_ D Organization: Unit of ass•t __ .&h§J'.!LOf_~_tocis ______lndJvidual liabllit, ____ unlimite.Q ___ _ I. Class . f•uthorizcd o_utstandinn Sustain. Par. val .• !,lkt. \al.tilo.fJrmtcry: 4 Del inqucnt $ ~~_lle~~j.o~-J!~,5l__ ~age~!__!!~_St5'_rY~--=e _.. ______------· 5 Unmatured $______6Currcnt liabilities $___ ------·------7 Current assets, good $____ Debt hi storY------·- 7.0 UJGirJ[ER-At~PRt.ISE4 ?HOJtCf :u::~~;,fiy- :) IRRIGt.TION St.:P?i_Eft,UH li-1:.. 7 G ~~ter Sources & Rights: I ------~~~£_2!~~~2~------~~~~~i~2~~~~~~------l~2!______~~~~~il1 _____ Am£~~!----~!£~~~2£~~ .> __Co_~ or agg__ B.i.YJu.·------~--J~5_Q______..6.:-...22=1.8_82 ______ll.9.!D____ 52..0..LSl.._s.f.. __ .4.0..,.0.Qo_ __ _ -~ ------· ------__ .9::.2~~1.9_1~--- ______3.5.a. ______119_._9J__ s.f__f-_ _i.,.QQO___ _ 4 ------·------~~~~19~4 ______3!ili~------1!LL81L ____ f-~L----- 5 ______..B.=.22=.la8.2 ______-..l=JJ.om.L---~ O.O..LQ.O. ____ _D..o.me.s. tic_ G E ~t. tot a I nor·m. annua I diver~ 1 on:, __ 22.6...J.Q.O______------·f------f------7 Ed.distrib. losses 20 %: net deity J8l,OQQ______,L.- ______L--- ______8 Storage cap 1 y__J1Qn.g_ ___ A.F. Lac. pt:;.of diversion: Car.tc.:.ts :::endin'] ___ l\QU..e______9 J)_iye[tji_]J(~--~-~QJJlL_JiiY~r_Jln_~~------~------1 o Sec. 3-T lS- R2.~=.ll..t.Lf...M.._..b.y_me.an_s_..Q.f_..a. ___ ------1 1 subs tant i&.l_Jl911L.;.insLb..e.;.id.g_a.t;.e__:w..Q.IU.._ ____ ------H Users 1 Entitlements: Unit of lntcrc~t ___ JUQ~J(e_~f_JltP~------_ge~~-;,~~~~~~~~~~:~~~-~~~~~~-- 1 U sua I 1 r r 1 g. s c· :, 5,)n: from _.Aptil...J.5_ to __Q_c_t_L_.l5______I c n 3th_ _l6J__ Qii..Y.S ~_B.Up.p.ly__ iLD.O.JJD.a.lly_ _fully ____ _ 2 :Jc II vc:ry :.;ch.::du lr. __ lY.ate.r._is__no_rmal~_nail.ab~e_..o.n_.d.eman~---- ..e.f.fe..cti.v.a.-:.onl.y_limited._b~----- 3 .S.QUle.._I.Q..tll.t.iQil_.C..Q.Ul.d_b..e__y.Jled-.QIL.h~AyY__ \l.s..e __ p..e_rio.d.S_t.. ______~_tem__c.a.p_a.city_._ __ li.rJlt_.5.20__ ~ f 4 En t d I cmcn t t=~c·r ,;n d of 1 n ~ ··r -: ~ t.Q_._9 __st.at ... in.c.h._p.ez_.sha.r.e_.YI.ith ____ .d.ec.r.eed._.ft.om._C.O~Q_.___.Riye.t:..t______s .0..--S_...s.t.a.t.....incll_.ca.nsi.de.re.d..._a__.f.ull._s.u.pp~- .f.or_on.e.._.ac.r.e...... ___ _Quali.ty__ is._ade~atJL______6 E~t~nt transferatlc ___ ~-JJLaULt~------1 :~~~~vc_::~~l:~:-~~-~at~r Sup~~~-~:~~:~~=-JiiJle~~CU1 ~~~o~s-~JloSB.-~45~19~------t Items S<:·'~')n :-,+::sl ~J-F-'.'] :.r~r [~~ ]j--,J--J~--[-:----]--s--t t_]___ N __ D __ ------~ ·------..:----- ____..;_ _:.-_.:._.~ ___ ..:::£ ___ --~!:!!: __ __ !!__:t__ -~~.:.- __£..!2_..:. J--o__c _.!.-- __ ..:. ___ _ 2 General prOJC:Ct r:d1n?: :.c. fL ;:-•.r '.:-c : i:.trlbuti::Jn in ;1c. ft. per Jere 1 7 7 7 7 6 ~ Supp y: :t ~:t;a·:l :e:~::::::::: ====lj4-~.=6_8-{J4-=:======: =.~4--7-== ::.:7:4::1:::.:: 7:4:~_:-.·-7==9=~=:=·.:7::6:~=~:=.·=7=Q0-=~=i-~==.·- 6-~4-=~:====::: 5 0 ------1------·------·------6 Dc:;irablc dcllv!::ry ______I---_9:..!.-00 ______hp_~~~S~_!~Q~-~ --~!.Y-~ ~-ion~~i~A ;-_i_~-~1! ------7 Effect i vc de: I i vcr y------f-Q~_tQ_lJ)e!_ a*__ _!..n__ ~~es_~ __Q_~- Uf!~-~! __! ~.!!_~~!.'!_ ~------8 R at i n g: %_lO_Q__ C I _ _I__ 9 Sasis of appraisal: (supply} Ac. ft. ;:>c:r __.§ll_ Di:..trl~·utlu~ 1r. fJI."rCL'fot 0t ::>cd~un totdl :~ ==---======--- --~·~--=~---==~-j=lo ± i5]==-i:;d: __!l f=J6==t=H=:b:J·t===== J Graphical Analysis of \'.'atcr Supply: llasis af Suppiy data - ___d.e.J.iY.e.l:~-tO __ tfte._lantL______Basis of per acre del ivcrics and classificJtion - _!il}_~~s_ _foj(_Qjl~~L------ The Grand Valley Irrigation Company, a mutual ditch company, owns and operates the Grand Valley Canal. The system serves approximately 37,000 acres of land extending from Palisade to a point 2 miles west of the town of Loma. The company formerly considered delivery based on 5/16 statue or miners inches per share with a full water right considered to be one-half inch per acre. A requirement of 64 shares for 40 acres was used under this set-up. They now have additional decrees which provide 0.4 statutory inch per share and result in a requirement of 50 shares for 40 acres on the basis of one-half inch per acre as a full water supply. The company considers the first share of stock held by each user as Class A stock and assesses this stock at a higher rate than the balance of each users shares, which are called Class B shares. The area has a large percentage of small units. The physical condition of the system has shown steady improvement over the years. Most wooden flumes and boxes have been replaced with concrete or steel structures, and the company has a constant program of canal lining and general rehabilitation. Drainage has been required in a large part of the valley. The entire irrigated area on the north side of the Colorado River, with the exception of the Grand Valley Project-U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, is included in one large drainage district known as the Grand Junction Drainage District. This district functions by means of an ad valorem tax on all assessable property within its boundaries, including municipalities, utilities, etc. The valuation of the property within the district in 1979 was $148,521,770 and the levy was 2.92 mills for a total revenue of $433,684. Drainage has been generally effective.; however, there are some areas in need of additional work and development. W - 138 PROJECT SUMMARY SUPPLEMENT 71 Rev . 6-75 NA ME OF COMPANY OR DISTRICT ~ _ G_M~D- V~"!:EY Ij{R,J:G~TJ:.ON _ CO}fPA.NY LOCATION __ G_ra.nd _Juqction.1 Cglo.rac!.o W,Q._ J?:_ _ AV ERAGE SEASONAL SUPPLY 19 45 TO 1979 Ap r. May. Jun. July. Aw9. S0pt ~ct. Tota.l Total of Water Effect- "F'ull Supply Actual eve Supply Closs 4.84 4.00 100 I ae : .. .' C,7 ,·· ·,1 ~Actual Deliveries ~ r I .J:t- \.. 1,! . : : ~ . •. I .. u .' a• .. . ;11 ·~ i i I I I ~ ·-~;~ Seosonol Supply l'n Acre Feet Per Acre ,..... ,..... ,...... :1" ~ ~ ~ Ln ~ ~ ~ ~ 1..(: \(l ..tJ r--...... C1'l ~ en m N" n- .Closs •"f ':":'!!:=- ...... '""= ' .. I'• ['- jl' tt ,Z -~ ~ r._- •'· l ~· J 5 .r I).'! I- '• If l·i • 1·.1 I ~;:SI :;.- ·~· t':: r-:- wr- .~ . · ~ '· •" ~ ~ ~ l l~ li .B ·r .:' -1''; ,l ~ . ~ ~ ~<~ l":,l, li I' ' 1:.1' 11 i I ~·~ 1 ~ ~ ~· ~ · · - " , t l"i' ~ ·. ~ 1 ~ I:\ I' l r ~ ~ ~ ~~ ,_ ~ ~ .b !• (. Ill. i ' l'' \I• h 1•:. ,.. . I.. I\' ,. r' ' ~.,., ; i I ~ 11. I I' I• IN; ' . ~ f · -, ·~ ~ 1 .1) h i, r~ '" .r, r..., l o' ' l f ' ' ~ H 1.- I' " -~ t~m·. ~ ~~ 1,} I 'l'r ; ~ I I"' I''J aJ I ·~ I ~ .~ ..g•l• •·: J•" ilil :~' l i 1•}1 '•.' St 11 '- .z. •.•· rm·i". .1 '1 ..( 1 ~- u ~ ['~ 1 - ~ · 1 lt 1 ' '!\~ l :t: IJ{ ' I"' l •'· li 1:-· p ~~ :. •t lr 1' 11:\t\li It I • ~ [-..i ._ · .t~ :,. l'1 I ~ I ' f'ti T FORM R-1 08 IRRIGATION COMPANIES AND IRRIGATION DISTRICTS WATER DISTRICT NO. __7_2 __ REV. 11-ee GRAND VALLEY IRRIGATION COMPANY WATER SUPPLY acre-feet 1 ACRES PER ACRE ') ( YEAR IRRIGATED June Oct. TOTAL DIV. DEL. 19 58 59 1960 61 62 63 64 1970 71 72 73 7 1975 76 77 78 36,88S 0.99 6.08 0.79 4.84 Diversion records less 20% estimated loss. • BASED ON NORMAL OUTSTANDING SHARES AT 50 SHARES FOR 40 ACRES 73 INCORPORATED LATERALS UNDER GRAND VALLEY IRRIGATION COMPANY APPLETON LATERAL DITCH COMPANY The Appleton Lateral Ditch Company is a small incorporated lateral of the Grand Valley Irrigation Company that diverts from the south side of the main Grand Valley Canal on the NW% Section 33-TlN-RlW-Ute Meridian. The lateral extends in a general south direction about two miles to the Independent Ranchman Canal of the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. The lateral was incorporated about 1918 to encourage all members to assist in keeping up the ditch. The corporate status of the company was not investigated but apparently they have continued to function as a company. The secretary reported there were some 220 shares outstanding and that shares were issued on the basis of 20 statutory inches, or 20 shares for each 40 acres. This would be equivalent to 20 shares of lateral stock for 50 share·s of stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. Assessments have varied over the years but should average about 25~ per share annually. ENTERPRISE DITCH COMPANY The Enterprise Ditch is a small lateral diverting at headgate 409 of the Grand Valley Canal of the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. The lateral was incorporated as the Enterprise Ditch Company in March 1963 for the purpose of borrowing money from the Wichita Bank for Cooperatives to concrete line the lateral. The lateral diverts from the Grand Valley Canal near the southwest corner of Section 34-T2N-R2W-Ute Meridian and extends in a southwesterly direction along a small ridge for about 2 miles. The lateral was incorporated on the basis of 1 share or fractional share for each inch or fractional inch of water each user is entitled to take from the Grand Valley Canal. Each share of stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company represents 0.4 statutory inches of water, therefore 1 share of lateral stock would be required for each 2i shares of stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. There are reported to be 94.75 shares of stock outstanding in the Enterprise Ditch Company, so the lateral ap parently carries 237 shares of stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. There are 8 members in the lateral company. The first 5,000 feet of the lateral is buried 12 inch PVC plastic pipe and the remainder of the system is open concrete ditch. There has been some problem with getting enough water through the 12 inch pipe, so they may need to go to 15 inch pipe at the upper end. A requirement of 1 share of lateral stock for each 2i shares of Grand Valley Irrigation Company stock should be made. The loan with the WBC will be retired this year. The assessment for 0 & M should be $4.00 per share ·Of stock in the Enterprise Ditch Company - in addition to the assessment for stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. 8-1980 74 Incorporated Laterals Under Grand Valley Irrig. Co. - Cont. GRAND VALLEY IRRIGATION COMPANY - Class C Stock - Ki·efer Ex tens ion In 1979 the Grand Valley Irrigation Company took over the operation of the former Fruita Canal and Land Company which was incorporated as a carrying lateral to operate the Kiefer Extension of the Grand Valley Canal. The company issued Class C stock to replace the stock in the Fruita Canal and Land Company on the same basis as the stock in the former company. There were 10,000 shares of Class C stock authorized with a par value of $10 per share. There are 7,502 shares presently issued and outstanding. The Kiefer Extension begins at the end of the Grand Valley Canal in the NW\ Section 6-TlN-R2W-Ute Meridian and extends some 16 miles in an irregular circle to terminate at the Colorado River in Section 10-TlN-R3W-Ute Meridian. The lateral apparently receives ample water from the Grand Valley Canal; however, there could be some problem of surpluses and shortages of water due to the extension being at the end of a long canal system. The company maintains a recording meter at the head of the Kiefer Extension to measure the amount of water actually delivered to the lateral. Class C stock was issued on the basis of 0.5 statutory inch per share rather than 0.4 statutory inch per share for Class A and B stock under the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. Irrigators under the Kiefer Extension should have both Class A and B stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company and Class C stock to represent the interest in the Kiefer Extension. The share requirement for Class C stock is 40 shares for 40 acres or approxi mately 40 shares of Class C stock for each 50 shares of Class A and B stock. The lateral is in fair condition at the present time. The assessment for 0 & M was $1.70 per share of Class C stock in 1979 and $1.90 per share in 1980. This assessment is in addition to the assessments for A and B stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. An assessment of $2.00 per share of Class C stock should be considered in estimating future water costs. j9 HAWKEYE LATERAL DITCH COMPANY The Hawkeye Lateral is a small lateral diverting at headgate 510 of the Grand Valley Canal. It has been incorporated for 1,000 shares at $5.00 each as a lateral company since the 1880's. The diversion from the main canal is near the southwest corner of Section 34-T2N-R2W-Ute Meridian and extends south for about a mile then angles to the southwest for about one half mile. The lateral is all concrete lined. 8-1980 75 Incorporated Laterals Under Grand Valley Irrig. Co. -Cont. HAWKEYE LATERAL DITCH COMPANY (continued) The lateral was incorporated on the basis of 1 share for each statutory inch of water each user is entitled to take from the Grand Valley Canal. Each share of stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company represents 0.4 statu tory inch of water, therefore 1 share of lateral stock would be required for each 2% shares of stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. There are 407 shares of stock outstanding in the Hawkeye Lateral Ditch Company, so the lateral apparently carries 1017 shares of stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. There are 15 or 16 stockholders in the lateral company, and the number is increasing due to sub-division. A requirement of 1 share of lateral stock for each 2~ shares of stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company should be made. The assessment for 0 & M should be $0.50 per share in the Hawkeye Lateral Ditch Company - in addition to the assessment for stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. LOMA DITCH AND LATERAL COMPANY The Lorna Ditch and Lateral Company is a small incorporated lateral from the Kiefer Extension of the Grand Valley Canal. The original incorporation was based on 5,000 shares at $10 per share. The company received a per petual charter on 3-24-1951. The Lama Lateral diverts from the Kiefer Extension of the Main Canal in the SE% Section 28-T2N-R3W-Ute Meridian and extends to the south and east for a distance of about three miles. The ditch has no concrete lining and is in fair condition except for some willow and brush infestation. There are some 660 shares outstanding with 17 stockholders. The shareholding is approximately the same as the holding of Class C stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. Irrigators under the Lorna Ditch and Lateral Company should have share for share of Lorna Lateral and Class C stock, or 40 shares each of Lorna Ditch and Lateral Company and Class C stock for each 50 shares of Class A and B stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company for each 40 acres irrigated. The suggested assessment for 0 & M is SO¢ per share of stock in the Loma Ditch and Lateral Company - in addition to the assessments for Class A, B and C stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. 8-1980 76 Incorporated Laterals Under Grand Valley Irrig. Co. - Cont. PAMONA LATERAL DITCH ASSOCIATION The Pamona Lateral Ditch Association is a small carrier ditch for water from the Grand Valley Irrigation Company, diverting from the Grand Valley Canal in the NW% Section 3-T1S-R7W-Ute Meridian. The canal extends in a southwest direction about 11 miles to the Independent Ranchman Canal of the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. Part of the canal is concrete lined. There are reported to be 726 shares outstanding with the shareholding under the Pamona Lateral Ditch Association being the same as under the Grand Valley Irrigation Company or 50 shares for 40 acres. The suggested assessment for 0 & M under the Pamona Lateral Ditch Associa tion is SO¢ per share - in addition to the assessment for stock in the Grand Valley Irrigation Company. 8-1980 \'1-136 77 ENGINEER-APPRAISER PRCJEC T SUMMARY Da t l" ______6_-,_1 __ 9 __ 7._5 ______ A I dent 1 f icat ion: WD 72 State ___QQJ_oraqg ___ County ____M~~~------Author __)J.G. Henderson I Name & address_J6~r~i~ __Irriji~~-~Q~--Q~~l!Y______Previous reports(date & author): 2 ~~~-q9~..L __g_q_!Q_JZ.ado ------·------Yr. or,;an i zed ______1.~~]__ -:._d,.H_.__QE_iffin 3 Form of organ i za t i on_Mutual__ dit~h -~~~~~------__ 4 Location servtce area_B1u_~~~O~~--Y~J_1e)L_~~~~]!_9_;_p_e~~q~~------Class of servtce (mark with x 5 No. acres: gr oss ___ ~OO______nct ____ 9QQ______sus ta 1n ·--~.QQ___ Drainage ______1---- 6 ------F I ood protection ---- 7 Loc~tion of rccord5 ___ §_~~~-~~~-~1~~-j!e~~~~------01rcct flow ___ ~~ 8 ------·------\',at c r Storage r c s . __ -·- 1 9 Over I a ps __ xd:.tb__ ~].u~~ton_~_.I!.t!:£-_l!_A~Q_Ciation.! __ _§_gE.!~------Supp Y Groundwa tcr ___ ,_ I 0 stoc~ho1de'!':§__ b.ave_~hare~_!-!l __ ~9_th_ditc:,he~.!------I rr i g. carr I cr serv. ___ r---- 1 I ------0 the r ------..___ B Appra i sa I & Lo~n St.1ndard5: U'l It ~f assessment share of stock I Fixed charges: O~M ___ ~_7_0/§_haf_~ ____ ; 8&1 ___ ==-~-======~:~~=-=---=--=~~~~~-~:~:~~~-:;-~:~- 2 Add i t i o" a I to I I s _!l_Q.ne______! t. c .::; ___ _l v :._,_!E_sb_ ~!...- 3 ------1&M 2.00------2.15 ----1.00 4 Srainagc classtf1catlon __ ~r~!!li!S~- i~-~rgina]._ _9n_;l~~_!>o!_~~m_!~E.~ __ fl&l ,______----- 5 ~long__~b.-~ .. r~ye~=--ya;.!-~-~-J-~Q!!L.!~ir to~o~.!.------To 1 1 s 6 \'Ia ter supp I y r;it i ng:~-~hare§__ ;p_1Z._~_Q._!l£re_s______c 1,;ss_!______--- Tot a 1 '-·---L-·--·-'----[2 .00 2.15 l.UU 7 8 ;~~;;-:~-:::~-~~~~::-;~~~~~~-~~::~ n g=-sha;;s=o-f-Stocki~s~b j ect-~Oll}EaDy------== 9 10 ------Loan poI icy r c strict; on s__ nop_t::______------_ I I lc Gen:::~~A=-i~:i.-lZ._~~~--ra~her--is~!ated area aio~g-=~he _golor~~o Ri~~r =~bove_ the ==- 13 en ~gl]1C~-to_J2~Begue __ca~Y<2P-~------ ======:;::;:======;~======:=;======--======~-======--======------=--====-- c Description of Service ArC'a Elev. 4900 No. days frost-free_ Percent P!'rccnt --l-6Sdays I ___ Q..C.Q21-2.C-~.!.!!~-E.LJ.~!!.Q_~E£ .. _ __f.. c !:.£E ____E.f_.9.C o s .L ...-Ei..!!£_t_ 2 _Al_~alJa ------· ___40_9 ___ 1-·------·--~- ;:;~ pr ~~~~ ot a I annua I~---- in. 3 Co~------~9~--- ______·--~--- 4 oats ______!9.9 ______J_Q___ ~~o~~e~ ~~~-feveftoflat ·rand" s Other______.__ 1.00______]._Q_ __ ~io~.&__!:!_le ~river, some w_ith _ 6 ------·--- ~ 1 ig._h_t__ s_l::-o_,p'--=e~. ---..,-----.,..-·-- 7 ------~------Dr il in age_ is~!o~- With a few 8 St:1tc-county Llx rates ______~~'l_OS.!__P~~!_~ a good part 9 Community dcvclopment __ is mode~_!:_.___ A_fe~ good headquar~: ~!-~he area~------...,--::~--- 10 ~"f~_ynits..!.._{lQ_od S_\l!'Jace_c!__roa4_~_ltl.!~-~ll_~_!:ilities Soi Is & productivity si c1 lm 11 _!!va_!lable.______with tight subsOir. 12 ------______~air-·~.:~~cfuctivity. ---- o Organization: Unit of ass I t __ sha;~of _!_tOC~------1 nd i vi dua I I i ab iIi ty rmriiOITea I Class f\uthoriz!'d Ouhhnd~'nSustain. Par val. Mkt._ val_. No.farms 5_ Av.sizcl60 Ac 2 co~2p----=-r-go-=:::..l9o =- --go __ ] ___ 31s f:..--_ ~o tQ__ ~2();"cres irr:- · 3 ------Tenancy_,_-._-______4------_ Nationality --·------5 Man a gemcn t_llS. tis f~-~~.9-~-'------.--:---·--.:-~--:--- E Operational Faci 1itics__12!yersion is made with a short concrete headwall located at a 1 .hend in the riY~L..in... which .J! slidin&._&!lte is instal lee!.!. __ Canal is about 7 mires 2 .lQng~lall~ level bottom land with no construction ..EE_Oblems. 3 ______.__ , ______------·------__ 4 Spec i a 1 const .hazards_...I\Q.ll~-- system Q.as~ven effective an~-~_!lomic~rover a s J.Qng period oLtinl~L------·------·------F Pro jcc t F i nanccs Annua I a v. : Ell:pcnsc, before B&l or dcp' n $ ------1 Condition as of------Dcp'n actually charged$ ______(Est.future $___ . ______) 2 Capital debt: ____,; $_____ Income: Scr. $ Other $______Total $______3 Payable---- to----- Ass•t ratcs:O&M B&I ______Totai _____Collcction history: ~ De I i nqucnt $------~ ------·------·--·------S Unmatured $___ .______------·------6 Current liabi litics $____ --·------·-·------7 Current assets, good $_____ Debt historY-----·--·------·-·------78 ~NGINEER-A~PRAISER ?ROJECT SU~M~RY - 2 I RR I GAT I ON SUPPLEMENT 1'1-1 37 1Jame ___ La_!:"kin ]:rrigation goll!E~~------·--·-- G ·:.der- S¢ur-ces & Rignts: Acr-e- ft. normal Decr-ees, permits, etc. 1 --CoTorad~amii~e~ou~~------2~nua 1 ~f6~~iz,~--~l3{_f§~a Da!;~--- _f_cl~tj..i~-- ---;;~~66----~io~ ~~£r. ======--======------==--======·==~=-~:]-~8!£=:::::~==~~===·------=-10------·-1------~~====~~:~-=== 5 ------·-·------·--·--·-'=====;:;:;;:::;;:o::n:==;::;,;;;;::=l---·-·------>------.- [st. tot1l norm. annual diversions 8100 AF t!. ~ . d i s t r i i::;, I o s s ~ s 40 %: n ct d c I ' y ----4-86-0--AF------~------r------7 ------·---·--··----'------i--·------StOr":'!]C cap 1 y_non~ ______:.J. !_oc. :;ts.c-f clivcrsion: Contests pending none __ ------======--== - --~~!.~_!la'Q._5L.§_~de_Q_!__;:!..Y.~!"_j;_.!I!!]._~-~-C!~~--Qf_ DeB~9.!!_e n~!lr _th~--~ent~~--Qf_~~c .21.-:~A.-9]J~------I; ~~~~~~-~~~~f~;~~~~==J;~~: .. ~ntitativ"C :.nalysis ?f ,',:ter !!~;t~g--======--======Suo;)::: nscc :::r diversion records less ======--======estimated loss. ======lt£~1~======-=1~.:~;~ ~;l~l===J~~;:~=J ~~~~--[~i~==j=j~;;:J:~ul:t_I-~~~~=I-s£~l=]=o~~~-J=-~~~=== '· :cncral proje-ct ratin~: :.c. ft.. ;:.cr :!::rc Distribution in ac. ft. per acre - s , ", p, , , :::::~:~~~:::::::.~-====;~:~=~=~i_i ~!i~~~~~~ ::;~ei~:~~~~~~i:r=~~~ i ~~~~~=:: ;:. :: c s i r a ;, I c a e I 1 v c r y ------r------1------4 • 00 -----1------1------· ------7 Effect i vc de I 1 ver-y 4 • 00 ------1------~------Rating: %_l_Q,9__ c 1_ _!__ 9 ::;sis of appraisal: (supp.y) t.c. ft. per_~~-- Distribution in percent of season total I.: ------~·----54!~ ~1-_____ J______t _____ J______±-----±------J ______j ______l ______I I ------______J_____ i ____ J______j ______j ______L______J Gn phi c a I f. na I ys is of \':a tcr Supp I y: 2 as is of Suop I y data - __ Delj..,Y~!Y_!:_~ the_lall4______=:asis of per acre deliveries and classific::tion- -~--~h~~~!_or_!t,Q__~~~------Water Supply This is one of two ditches diverting from the Colorado River above the entrance to DeBeque Canyon and some 20 miles above the main irrigated area around Grand Junction. These ditches divert in Water District 45 and the water is used in what was Water District 42 now Water District 72. There is little in the way of historical diversion records under the ditch as there has always been ample water available for these priorities. Measuring devices were required in 1970 and good monthly records of diversions are available since that time. There was a report in the Glenwood Springs office of the Division Engineer that 8.11 cfs of the 25 cfs granted as Priority 2 had been declared abandoned, but this was not verified by court records. 79 'N -13~ PROJECT SUMMARY SUPPLEMENT R l!V. 6· 75 NAME OF COMPANY OR DISTRICT ------Larkin Irrigation Company LOCATION _ ..De.Be.que, colorado _ _ W,Q. __7'1:_ _ AVERAGE SEASONAL SUPPLY 19 71 TO 19 74 Ap M0 1v.IJu J 1 A g s to~ t Total Total " of Woter 1.1 r. · •:"~1 uiy. u · ep· c · At Effect· full Supply 1.0 '~ \•. ·i! c uo 1 ave SuoDiy_ Clos' • ..f .. ·.. 40 !± DO 100 I 0.9 /'·:~~ ·~ ~ QB 0.7 OJ ~ u a~ 4: OJ ~ ~ 0."1- 0.. 0.:§ ...,..: LL. 0,2. ~ '- 0.1 ,;; ; . i. :·.: .~· . . ·:· .. ·- ~ :·.· : . . Seasonal Supply m Acre Feet Per Acre [Cios~ ~~~~~~~·~~~4-~~~~~-r~-r~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+4~ z~~~~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-+~~~~~r+~~~~~~~4-~- B~~~H-~~+4~~~~~~~~r+~~~~~~-r~~~~~r+~~-r~rr~~~~ .6r+~~rl-·'·r+~~~~-r~-r~~~r+~~~+4~~~~~~r+~~~~~~~~-r~~ > ~~~.. -.~~~ .. ~~~-r~~~~~r+~~~~~~~~-r~~~~~-~~~-r~~~~~~ ~ :•· '.', ~·. ~ .~~~~~~~+4~~~~-r~r+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-r~~~~~~- u :·~ .· ..; ·::•. <4.0~~.~·1:,+.~;·~~~4-~~~~~~~~~~4-~~~~~~+4~~~~~~~~~~~~~-+-r~ ~·~~.• ~~~~+4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-r~~~~~~ _,l:tl~t:Pttt=tttttt:t=ttttt:t!:t:ttttijnttttt=tttttij=t=t::t:tm=t=t::ti .~~~~~~*.-~~-F~~~~~~~~~~~-r+1-r~-~~~~~~~~-~·4-+-i~~~~~;-~~ ,.._ .Zr-~~~~r+~~~~~~-r~r+;-~~~~~~~~~~~r+~~~~-r~~~~;-~ ~ l- ~3·0~~~~~~tt~~tttt~~~~~~t4~~~tt~~~+4~~~44~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~·~~~+4~~~~-r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-r~-r~~~~~~~ < -~~.~~~~~~~~4-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .z. '1 BASIS OF SUPPLY DATA · Delivery to the land BASIS FOR CLASSIFICATION· 4 shares for 40 acres Estimated overage form requirement for full supply 4.00 acre ft. per acre. Main canol losses 40 ~ Lateral losses " Diversion requirement full supply 6.67 acre ft. per. acre. 80 FORM R·1 08 IRRIGATION COMPANIES AND IRRIGATION DISTRICTS WATER DISTRICT NO. _...;_7_2 __ REV. 11 ·66 Larkin Irrigation Company WATER SUPPLY acre-feet ACRES PER ACRE YEAR IRRIGATED April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. TOTAL DIV. DEL. Little d .. versior data i s availa ble pri pr to 1 c 70 as n p measu1 ing device w ;iS requi red - a nple wat er avai ~able. 1971 900 269 1~354 2!1268 1~511 608 1 ~045_ 788 7 .. 843 8.71 5.2 2 72 658 1!457 1!650 969 774 1!166 tL!032 7.706 8.56 5.14 73 490 1.048 1.845 1.794 1~697 1.028 722 8!624 9_L58 5.7 5 74 793 1.626 1.326 1.379 950 1.095 [.170 8~249 9_._16 5.5 0 75 900 - 729 1,208 1,723 1,359 1,674 ,416 8' 1Q2 _9_.0].__5.! 0 -- 76 - 1 085 1 237 1 020 983 ]36 774 5.835 6.48 3.8 9 6()6 77 1 .404 1 CJOA 2.083 1 024 498 _269_ --- _1.,.4.2~ ... ----8.33 - ..s.o - 0 78 - 1 255 1.656 1.284 1 .. 187 417 614 6,413 7.12------4.2 7 79 - 816 2.219 1.598 515 148 - 5,296 5.88 3.5 3 - Ave. ( 1971-74) 530 1 371 1 772 1 .413 1 .007 1 083 928 8 105 Ave.Di v/ac 0.59 1.52 1.97 1 57 1 .12 1 20 1 .03 9 00 AVE. I eli_v/ac 0.35 0.91 1,18 0.94 0.67 0.72 0.62 5,40 • BASED ON NORMAL OUTSTANDING SHARES AT __4 ___ SHARES FOR __40__ ACRES Diversions less estimated 40% waste and loss. 1'1-136 81 ENGINEER -APPRAISER PR O.Ji: ·~ i ;,~::.~~.~:.r. ~ ~· •~ t ._. _____.J!l_~!f.-~_19]_Q_ ____ A I dent j'f icat ion: WD 42 State __ ,C_q_1grad_q_ ___County __ .M~P:. ____ -··-~-·-·- :.. d her ___ld..t_(b_Jlep._derson __ _ I Name & address __ .R_alisad~_l!!'J:.~ tio_n_pis t_ri~t ______: ~ ~ .. 1 :;us re ;->or t s (date & ~~~ h-;r;: 2 Pric~_A!!_c:_l} __~~-_5!is_!!!butigg__~!lE:~]- ______Yr. rr :~;,r, I :··~-!~_Q_4 __ !_~_'±.f.:-_Gr!l.!!Jl______3 Form of organ i za t i on_Q_!'_&anized -~_iS!_~ic_~_!_QE__EroJ.~~-L ______!9_37 _:-_G.!:!~fin-Mar.f_ell~~-- 4 Location service are6a_Pa_~!~~de__ ~~--~E~-J~~~-~!~-~:a~~.Y~.~~~.Y.~~l~1 ~l:.~.c (•~ :•·r,,r~· r~'Jr': ~~~h ~~.\ : 5 No. acr (' s: gr 0 s ~·-----~QQ_Q ______nC' t_5_,_1.Q_Q_j__1;_r_ig_._S\JS ~ ,, 11"1 ._5_,_7_Q"------Gr '!I r .• C• ------1 6 F lr-':'d rro~-:~~·Dn 7 -;_:~~~-o-;,--~-~~~~~~= __s;~e_t.ar; _ _;i~~~.d_ln~P~i;-~~~~~~J;._=~ . t ~-,·ct ~~~~-~~ i~J : O~~~~~=J~Tbe~~l~~=i;=fu=Hi&bii~:::::: ~,,,,, ,::c.:;:,,: :=: i=J I 0 _.c.anal_Jlf_ _tha...Gz:and.._J[.a.l.le_y__.EI:.ojJ!c_t_~~.B. .. R.....______l ~ r I ·;. ~ ., ~' • ' :. '·" '. ---- :.___ J II :--·.,-, ,. ______L_J B Appra i sa I & Loan St.lndards: Un 't of ass'"ssr.,r:nt ___diatr.ic.t_.a.c.r.e ______.. ______. ____ . -· 1 Fixed charges: O<'.M_~5_!..~2__l?e;__,!l_~re_; B&l ______:-______•.r-.: 1 • .. _ _:: ___1:,-·.·· :···· _.,·-~.· .. -._., .. 2 Addition a I to I I s_.t\_~~a i-~- a~se_~~~-4_-~nde;:__the__ {i_;-al}~t,~J~~~~-~Q!l: _____ .___ ~:,_.: ___ __::·::: ..: ... _, __ : '--~~:- .. :._:. ~-- .. - 3 _.R_ra_~~age_A!st:_;:ict__ ~..!-~2-.!!!!1-_!_~_q_n_ V!J.u!_t:.io_!l_!.!L.!-~§~)______-;1:' ;,.. !.A! __QQ~-~!.~-~J _J_!,Q.9 ~ ~~~:~:_:~:~:~ n ~-Ge====~===~ f ~e~ t~~- e~~===~==-~~====~=~==~~:·: . ·. ~-==--t_:~~~L -~ _- 6 \'1 a tcr supp I y rating: _jlC_!"_es_'llQ]._c:!.i!l.&._~_i:_~_!:ri,c t;__]."_~gh_t;_~ ___ t ; :: e __ ___ ); _ ·--- _J • : , , ._ ----· _L ..... _j ______7 ______.. ______ 8 Evidence of users' rights, for loan closing_~cres ~sSef!~ed u~Q..~:r_.Q.ist;_ri~t;_-~~-showg._J2y______9 _,Fe£-g_rg__!!L..Q!_fic~_gj__!:_q_unJa~_A§.~-~~sor_ or di§ t~j.g_secre_~ary ______10 Loan poI icy restrictions_ non~:cqg§_~c_!~.I__OI!_!i_,Sa!!_~_ [email protected]..!...._Term _Q!l_Q;"J:A~l"- I ----~!:.Q.2~-2C-~l~~-.QLJ.!!!~~~!-- --~£!:~~-----of _.9!.22.L __ Q.f._~f~------_ ~ 2 -~JJ!tlfa ------__ L,_iQ_Q______.f_Q__ ~;err. r:-r ·~·c 1 ;:J! t c.~:'' :,,.,,~;:, ; ____§..!.1,_, __ 1 r .• 3 _COI!l------_____lQ_Q_ __ ------·---~- j\._prt!-Q~J;.Ql>_~~-aver !.,_.2_!_2 _in.J~__ _ 4 Jri..t-..rul~tUrL ______l,_-2_00 ------___ 26 --- 7 Op0-:' ~('\tIn ~l-~eve.l_bel;!~.h_.!-~~9__ !!1 s _.Qrch_l!!d~------___ L,.2_ OQ_ __ ------___ 26 __ -~-~.r_ip_J!P.P_ro~_]-__¢. _wi9_~-]?~~een 6 _Mi~~-'L------~----so_o______10___ Pri_ce_A!j:ch __ ~d_Gr. Valley__ Canal. 7 -·------Dr,; In:;~(' _ _§y~ t~IJL9_U:e~n dr~:!n~_ 8 State-county tax rates______E:.ro_yid~Q-~y__ G!'-! __ J.!-!.l!~t:h~-~------9 Community dcve lopmcnt_i.Lgener.a.l~-iOOd. Some neLhnu..s..~ A:~ain_!l.,S¥_ _12!~-~!ict.! ______10 ..iJli_~tmc.tion._and. land de:v:el.opmen.Lin progress. so;~~ l. productivity __ y~~!abl~_g_!'_~_y si 11 _All_ll.tilitie.s... JU'.iLJL'l~a.h.l~------· ___cl __ ~--~Q- sa_lm_~n~!"a!!.r__de~p 12 ------_an~L..E!'_~du_c:_~i ve..! ______0 Organization: Unit of ass 1 t_Jlistrict .a._cr.e______lndi·;idual liab•lity __ .unlimi.t.e~.:L __ _ I Class Authorized Outstandin_g ....~usta.in. Par val. M~t..• ~al. No.f 4 ------___ _ ------Nat 1 on a 1 it y American 5 Management is good______.______------E Operationa 1 Fac i 1 it i es Price Ditch with a capacity of abg_!lt_lSQ_cf~_!-nd __le.!!8_th __ Q!_ _!!__ 1 miles is pro1ect ~nal. Water supP.l~ed~~ailwater f;o~_Price-Stu~_Pum2~_some 2 20 to 25 mile~£ laterals §er~ the area. Part of the area is served ~Kravity 3 frQ_~headgates [email protected] Cap.al of Grand _Va_ll~Project. ------~-- 4 Spec i a I const.hazards_]:i~ of a se.xi9..llL.ni.t..\l"U... The hy,dr§..!lli£.J?.U~ML_QJ;l~ra~~£_-~y_!;h~-- S Grand Valley Project appears_ in good condition. ------F Project Finances Annua I av. _: E~epense, befor~ B&l or dcp'n $ ------1 Condition as of------Oep'n actually charged $______(!:'st.futur~ $______) 2 Capital debt: ---~ $_____ Income: Scr. $ ___ Other $______Tota I $ ______3 Payable ___ to Ass't ratcs:O&M~~..2__B&.I _ _.:-____ Totai~L~~--r:ollrcticr- ri!.to~y: lt De 1 i nqucnt $ Collection history has been good. A~.!J,!!~ments _!eviec!_!>)"_ s unmatured $ Q..q_~_tz_Assessor and collected wiEh _j~n~:a!_ taxes. ------6 Current liabi litics $----1------·------7 Current assets, good $____ Debt hi story Satisfa~~t~o~r~y~------·------82 ENGINEER-APPRAISER PROJECT SUMMARY - 2 IRRIGATION SUPPLEMENT n-137 G ~ater Sources & Rights: Acre - ft. norma I G(;crees, perrr.its, etc. I ______N~!_of ~!:.£!____ ~~!l~~.£.C.~J..Q.Q!_r-----.J.l.£~------_.C!:.i.£.Ci.l~-- ___ £:~2~0.!._ ___ i.2.C_.C!~2£.C~~ 2 _J;.Q.!gr ado _Rill_L______l ______lQ.::l:-_l683. -.PQ~-- ._l83_(4)______57.J. .. .O_Q ___ -----=------3 ------______lQ:-_l:-.1.8.8_9. -ln:i&.... _l83_(4)______8_Q .. .O_Q _____ 5~3.5_Q ___ _ 4 _ffi! v~~§ ions _j. nglug~_ ~ Sup pI y: :::; : :c :~::::::===. : __ :::::=-=: ==-= :-::: ::::~ :::~i~::::~]::::: ~:~:-:::==::: 5 to ta , ______.fJ:..lU _____ r------Q....34_ Jh.1.8_ __ .Q....B.J.. .0.....8.4_ __ .o._a3___ 0...... 5.9 ___ 0...5.0.. .. ------6 Desirable deli vcry ______.J...as. ____ IAhont_.as_ Qlrtrn.Jn-1-a.s.e.d.. ..del~lT.eJ:¥-- o_..la.nclown ------7 Effective del ivery ______lat~'l'a.l.-'U:~...c.a.rrlage._ t.ch_lol.~th.- :v.e.y.ance...~as. ------8 Rating: %_]._Q.Q __ c 1 _ _L__ to the land absorbed by the landowner. 9 Basis of appraisal: (supply) Ac. ft. per~-~'-- Distribution in percent e>f S('~lSon tot.JI I 0 ------·-1----j__ _i ____ J ____ ±---±------1------1------'------1 I ------______j_]_ __j_ _ _l§__J_]-8 ---· _]._2. __ __ _18 --- __ ]._~---· _]._Q ___ L------J Gr a pn i c a I An a I ys is of \'1 at er Su pp I y: Basis of Supp I y data - __ff_qj~-'l~-q~]._;ly~_J;:Y_-:_19_!;_2.=.9-~------___ _ Basis of per acre deliveries and classific.:dion- CQ~.Q.~!l-~Q __q~].-~y~j:'.Y__Q_; __~~]._i~_?._ Normal Supply vs Desirable Dist Seasonal Supply - Acre Ft. per Acre Class 11 ~ 'j l.tell t LIL' .t~ r:: J 11' 11 Jl t I '1~( 1 '~rili II- Ill to '(ff 'r~ rt " 1~ ~~ ~.I:' ~.t r Jlt IJIJ. IOJ ~·' Q) 1 1\J ·:-; 1nJ; lAili h' ~I'\ Q) IC~F El 1'rJ ~1,1 J-4 'Fr 1'1 C) t1 'J:•J:IC l !S .:E .F ~ < ,. J-4 Q) & ~ ~ +) (I) • Q) rs.• rz.. Q) 2! J..t u C) ~ < Months ot the Season Years as above 83 FORM R·l 08 IRRIGATION COMPANIDS AND IRRIGATION DISTIUCTS \\'ATER DISTRICT NO. REV. l, ·156 ----=:l4uo.2 __ Mesa County & Palisade Irr. Dists. \\'ATER SUPPLY Delivered to laterals-acre-feet ACRES PER ACRE YEAR IRRIGATED April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. TOTAL DIV. DEL . . 1959 7~353 3 .467 5 327 5 234 5~096 4 701 1 f)9] 2 119 29 847 4. 06 60 7.356 2 263 5 102 5 189 5 683 5 1)')0 1 46R 2 971 30 126 4 09 61 7 424 2 351 5 111 5 517 5 845 5 111 ? 1:\?R ? 107 28 792 1 RR 62 7.389 2 895 5 226 5 457 5 695 5 180 1 759 3,038 31 450 4 26 63 7.410 2 890 I) 5'57 5 288 5 ] 54 4 Q'l? 6. ?1:\? 1 196 _31 489 4~ 64 7.200 2 094 6 064 7 339 6 121 7 Q1? 5 810 s 143 42 201 I) 86 - --·-·-- - ~ ---~~- - 1965 7.080 1 197 5 97~-- -- 7 096 7 360 7 'i04 4 4f.6. 1 R?1 37 .416 5 28 2 8Q1 66 6.880 6 49'i 6_.633 7 ~5Jt f-_6_, .833_ ~_.5~]_0 _4,722~ ~ _4~0,004 ---. 5. ao 67 -- ---· - ··- 6.1 410 . ·--- 6 .. 3.0 68 6 .. 580 2 010 s 500 5 795 6 2'50 ') 11 0 lL 770 4 675 14,. 110 I) 18 69 ---- 1970 4,200 678 3,840 3,719 4,071 3,864 2,683 2,579 21,416 5.10 71 4,200 2,521 3,284 3,302 3,563 3,322 2,446 ... 2,096 20,096 4.89 72 4,400 3,248 3,810 3,820 4,010 3.954 2,844 1,845 23,531 5.36 73 4,200 1,090 3,827 4~202 4,364 4.492 3,427 2,847 24,249 5.77 74 4,000 901 3,599 3,590 3,694 3,739 3,022 2,252 20,797 5.20 1975 4.460 649 3.337 3 .. 444 3 .410 3 1:\Rfi ? Qfi1 2 292 1 q 681 l& .. 41 76 4.400 ] 694 .3 290 3 .. 191 3 .552 3 1R.R 2 RI:\Q 1 R?7 1 q 801 l& CiO 77 78 4.160 360 3 676 3 805 4 .070 u. 034 3 .. 290 2.475 21.710 5.22 79 4,000 - 2,904 3,494 3,898 3.816 3 .. 327 2.227 19.666 4.91 I(I,S'i-1..9) Ave. 7 200 2 .460 5 600 5 9SO 6 oc:;o c:; Q~O 6. ??n ~ f\00 ~6. f\90 Lt Qn AVE./ llcre 0.34 0.78 0.83 0.84 0.83 6.59 0.50 4.83 acre from District records. • BASED ON NORMAL OUTSTANDING ~XXXXXXXlQCXlSKXKD:5XDQCxxxxxx~ Diversions for both districts are combined since they are measured at the same point-Price-Stub Pump. 84 Palisade Irrigation District - cont. Project History The Palisade Irrigation District is the result of the efforts of a group of settlers to develop an irrigation system during the late 1800's. The project was started in 1889. They organized a mutual company known as the Mount Lincoln Land and Water Company in 1892 and exchanged their rights in the system for stock in the company. A second mutual company known as the High Line Mutual Irrigation Company was organized in 1894 to take over and extend the distribution system. The Palisade Irrigation District was organized in 1904 and issued $160,000 in bonds to purchase the pumping plant and water rights from the Mount Lincoln Land and Water Company and the outstanding stock in Canal No. 1 (Price Ditch) of the High Line Mutual Irrigation Company. The Price Ditch, which is owned and operated by the District, originally diverted water from the Colorado River in Section 2-TllS-R98W-6th P.M., by means of a hydraulically operated pumping plant. In 1909, this District and the Mesa County Irrigation District cooperated in constructing a sub stantial diversion dam in the river, each issuing $88,000 in bonds to cover its share of the cost. Difficulties in maintaining the power canal and pumping plant lead to a joint contract between the Palisade Irrigation District, the Mesa County Irrigation District and the U.S. Government on May 31, 1918 whereby the Government agreed to divert and convey in the Highline Canal the water to which the Districts were legally entitled to divert for irrigation. For the Palisade Irrigation District, this amount was set at 80 cfs with this amount to be delivered at two specified points for distribution in the Price Ditch. No water was to be delivered before March 20 or after October 31 except at such times as the Highline Canal may be running water to the Grand Valley Project-U.S.B.R. In addition the District authorized the Government to carry in the Highline Canal for such uses as it may see fit the 573 cfs of power water formerly utilized for pumping purposes. Under the contract the District assumed no obligation in connection with the Grand Valley Project except for a carrying charge for delivery of their water. All the district bonds were retired by 1932. Another provision of the contract would permit the District to dissolve and become a part of the Grand Valley Project by surrendering its water rights, canals, and other properties to the Government. Although the District retired the last of its bonded debt in 1931, it has not elected to make use of this provision of the contract. Water Supply The court decree of 7-22-1912 granted Priority 4-renumbered 183-dated 10-1-1889 for 80 cfs to be used for irrigation and 573 cfs for power to pump the irrigation water. The change of the point of diversion from the Palisade-Mesa County Diversion Dam to the Highline Canal was approved by the court in the general adjudication of 7-25-1941, which decree also granted additional priority 506 for 23.50 cfs with priority date of 6-1-1918. This decree provided that the Districts' total appropriation of 103.50 cfs should be delivered as follows: 85 -2- Palisade Irrigation District - cont. 79.5 cfs at the Price Ditch immediately south of the Price- Stub Pumping Plant. 3.0 cfs into the East Lateral. 4.5 cfs at Headgate No. 1 on Government High line Canal. 7.0 cfs II II No. 2 " II II II 1.0 cfs II II No. 3 II 11 II " 3.5 cfs II II No. 4 II " II II 5.0 cfs II II No. 5 II II 11 II 103.5 cfs Total As indicated, the biggest part of the water for the Palisade District is delivered near the Price-Stub Pump, which is located a few rods from the southwest portal of Tunnel No. 3 on the SW~ of Section 3-TllS-R98W-6th P.M. The Price Ditch is considerably lower than the Highline Canal at this point, which provides a convenient drop to develop the power needed to pump the 40 cfs of water decreed the Mesa County Irrigation District from the Highline Canal up into the Stub Ditch. In actual practice then, the Government does not use the 573 cfs of power water owned by the Palisade Irrigation District nor the 627 cfs of power water awned by the Mesa County Irrigation District. Officials believe; however, that the wording of the contract and the physical fact of power use by the Government have kept these power appropriations in force and immune from possible action for abandonment. In other words, if the contract with the Government should ever be terminated, the Districts could rehabilitate their power canal, install new turbines and pumps, and provide their own water. Project Assessments The Palisade Irrigation District has no bonded debt or construction obliga tion. The only expense is a carrying charge for delivery of water by the Grand Valley Project under the contract with the U.S. Government. This assessment is currently $4.25 per project acre with some 6150 acres shown as being assessed. The project acreage is also included in the area of the Grand Junction Drainage District which levies a mill tax on all tax able property within the district, including municipalities and railroads. The levy for drainage is 1969 was 2.69 mills on a valuation of $66,822,523. Levies for both the Palisade Irrigation District and the Grand Junction Drainage District are certified to the County Assessor in the fall of the year for inclusion on the tax rolls along with the general property tax. Conclusions The Palisade Irrigation District is considered to have a full Class I water supply. The assessment for Operation and Maintenance is $4.25 per acre, which charge is levied directly against the land under a contract with the u.s. Government for delivery of water. There are no general engineering restrictions on loans within the district area. Consideration should be on a case basis using the policy on orchard properties where applicable, and paying particular attention to drainage and degree of development on each unit. \'1-136 86 ENGINEER-APPRAISER PROJECT SUMMARY Date_~- !J_r~------A 1dent if icat ion: WD 72 State_..Q2J-~rad2 ___County ___tfe~~------Author --~.!_q. Henderson I Name & address_~_!uestone_1>_=h~~-l!_!_~~p_cia_t:_!ol! ______Previous reports(date & author): 2 De~~-q~~- C~!~£ado ------Yr. organ i zed_]._936_ !J3 z__ -:.J..&.l.L_Gr:{..ffin --- 3 Form of crgan i Z?..t i on _ _¥opnal_dit~!!_-~~S2Cia_!:ion______------·------·-- 4 Location serv1ce 3rea Blu_~st~~--Y!l_~ley_~~~_!:_g_p_L!>_eBeg,_':!~------Class of service (mark with)( 5 No. acr(' s: gr os•" ______?200______r, d ___ ,?QQQ______s:..J s t <> i "'·--~-Q.QQ.___ Drainage ______r--- 6 --.------Flood protection------~--- 7 Location of r~Ccords __~-~.!-~J:.~e _Al_l;_en_LP-~~~-~~!1--~---QffJ:.'=~--~B-- 0 i rcct f I ow ___ ~~-- 8 _gi t:LA!~A!.L_]eBe.s_':!.~J_ __9g_l;,gr~~p______\'I d t c r s tor a gc r c s. ____ 9 Ovcrlaps_ngn~.!_ __ Ar~~_§~-ty~_ I I ------·--- 0 t her------__ 8 Appra i sa I ~ L oi!~ ,::, u;r.cards: Un, t 0f a :;scssmcnt __ sha_!."_Ei~ __:hTI__~l;:!b jec~-a~~p_ci_?_t;_~gp______1 Fixed charges: G~.•.!_j_~~_;)Oj_sh?_~~----i b~l ______-::- ______untll __--==-. Costs pe-r sustaining acre 2 Addition a I to 1 1 s _ __p.one -----···---~------l tc_!!! ___ _b v ~-.-t!lsb_ ill__ 3 ------·------·--J ,!JM --~dQ -~ OQ. --- 4 Ora ina 9c c 1 ass 1f, ::::. t i on_yal;:_~~_s__ f.FO'!!L.&QPd tO_EQO~_de~p.din_g__Q_TI-______B& J ____ ,..._. _____ ---- s J. oca ~.!.Qn..._tn..._t;he__ pxQ.iet~!-_3!!"~~.!------______r o 1 1 s 6 \'!at c r sup p I y r a ~ 1 r. 9: -~Q_§.h.~!"~-~-_f_q_;-__4Q __ aC j:'e ~------C I il s s _l______To t <1 I __f.! 50 d • 0 Q_ ..___ __ 7 ------8 Evidence of use-rs' rights, for loan closing shart:t~_of_§tOCk i..!!:_t;_Q.g__~SSQC:i:_C!tion. ------ 9 ------·------10 Loan po 1 icy rcstr ict ions ___ill)n~-·-~!:~-~jloul_c!_!>e_J.!_~~.fl- itL~onside_Fi!l_g__g.~~ina~n______ I I .!.Q!!!_El_!!_;:~!l_~------12 Genera 1 :_4_rea_~Qp_ably_.&Q.od_ra_th~r _j.solated_~r~,!l-~_q,TI.&.....!!te_Colo!:ac!_q_~iver ab~-- 13 the_~!lt rapcg__to _]J~B~_9J!~--Q~P..YQ!l_!.. ______ ======;======c======~======:======-----;:=-:c==-= C Description of Service Area E!ev.495Q______No. days frost-freel65 Percent Percent I ______Cr£E~-£~_!l~2-E!_l~~~-~~~-- __ 6£r£~ ______of_gr£~1- __ Ei~!J_ ------2 j]._fa!fa______90.9___ ·~------__ 5..2___ Norm. pr ec i p: tot a I annua 1_]._g _____ in. 3 COpl______l_QQ____ ------__ J.2.___ 4 Oats 200 10 s Oth~!-====--====~-== 200____ ------== -10 == 6 ------+------7 ------·------.______.._ ____ 8 S t \1 t c- county t J x rat c s------9 Community dcvclopment __ is mode_!t.__ ~A~-q_at~h~adquarte~~ 1o buildings on most UI.!!tl!.!_ Good__ ~_E.fa£ed_;Qad_s___ ~:7~""&~rod~~~~~ t y si _cl_lm__ .__ 1 1 thr2-_':!8,h the ~~~L.!!.l}~__ all _ __lltiliti~~~y~ilable. !ar~~.!i fr_~roduct!.Y~Eo ___ 12 ----·------_ ~eeped__ !n 6 Current I i ab iIi tics $____ ------·--·-----·------·-·------7 Current assets, good $~---Debt history~~~··-~---·-----~-~-·------~~---·----- 87 EN G I N[ ER - AP P R f• I SE R PR 0 J EC 1 SU IM~ AR Y - 2 IRRIGATION SUPPLEMENT ~-137 Namc __ ~lu~stone Di~_A_._s_s_o__ c_i_a_t_~_·_o_n ______·------·---·--- G \'.'zder Sources & Rights: Acre- ft. normal Decrees, permits, etc. I ______!!2_~.£_ of~~!:.£.£ ______~~~~_i_~!:.E.J.£~~-l..F.ri&a.J..i.£~.Date__ -~!:J.£!:iiL_ r---~£.:!~.!. ____ ,_..!.E..r:_~2.£!:.!~ 2 __ gp_~or~gp_~j._y~F------_ _j.._h_Q.QQ______1- ].-1~2,J______!_~2.{i} ____l2_._ll __~f~_L2Q.Q_ __ _ 3 ------~=J.~!~l~------·-JJ)6 ______.__ 16~-~2-~f _____~Z5 ___ _ 4 ------~=J-!~9~------__ ;t!_____ ---~~-Q~s_f __ ~rn. __ ___ 5 ------·------1------6 [ ~. t. tot a I norm. ann ua I d i ve r s i on s __ ].L OOQ__AF__ ------7 Est.distrib.losses 40$: net del1y ___ J0,20Q_M______.______.______ 8 Storage cap 1 y__ !lQTI~______A.F. Loc. pts.of diversion: Contests pending ncn1e 9 Left on south bank of Colo. River in the ------'a Jii:L~--as~-i6w-!n G~~£i;!§ gg-~-ni ~~i§I<2~-== ~=--===--======11 ------is in Water District 45. ------H U scr s 1 En tit I e~cn t s: Unit c f 1 n t er c s t ____fih_~~~--QJ __ li~.9-Clk. ______..§cncr a I cff cc t i v en l' s s ( ouan. !, au;, ; • ) I ~sval 1rrig.s~ason: from __ 4=_l2 ______to __l9:~2 ______1cngtnJ_~J__ g~)r~ __ pive~~!J>n§_~!Jt_in__ ~]t~ess ____ _ - l'· c• I ' v c r '! ~ c he d u I c __ p_Q_~Q~!l_t!-.9J1_p_~~£.t!S:_~Q.__ -:__~l!,~~-~-.!_~_n_Q!!l!I!!.!Y_ __ o (_~ u~_l__~-'=-~nc!.~!£~.!------____ _ 3 ------available. 4 [nt it I cmcnt per 'Jn it of i ntcre:st_~_q_-ra!=~__ Qj__ a~C!_il_~bl_~_s..':!:2E..!Y..!.. ___9...l!.alit:y __ !~_gg_£~.!------5 6 "E~"t:~"t-"t~~f:~~~~----~o t-1 imi t;ci------ I Quanti ta~ i ve l.na I ys~~-:-;-~~~~-~upo~~-~:~~~-~~---d{,;;-rsi~~-;~~~;dsl~~~ed-l~-;;.------I =--======lt;;~======~-=~~£~;n i£1~l===~~E-M_] AQ~~--[=M~~:J=~:n£=:t:1~x_J[-~~:-J[-s£El=:J-o~~~-~ ~=;=== 2 General projc:::t rating: Ac. ft. per acre Distribution in ac. ft. per acre 3 Su pp I y: d i r ec t f I o ~ ------· ____ ..:!)_,_14______------·_____ ------~------~------~------4 5 ::::: ~:::::::::::::·---s·:i4·:·=~o~~:iput~ ;;~-~~=~ !!_ ~~.~~r~_;= _I=i;i~ -;;me ~ s ~~==: 6 Desirable del ivery------1---_5~00______----1------·------7 E f fcc t i vc d c I i v cry------____ _!±_. 00_____ 1-----____ .______------~------8 Rating: %__ l,.Q_Q_C I _ _L._ 9 5asis of appraisal: (supp!y) Ac. ft. pcr_§}:l__ Distribution in percent of season total 10 ------_ _2~ AF --I---_J--±----1--J__±___ J______j ___±----- I I ------______._ ____ j ______J. ____ j______j ______j _____ . ------J Graphica! t.nalysis of \':atcr Supply: B:~sis of Supply data -_peliv~_;y to_!:h~.land ______Basis of per acre deliveries and classific:dion- ~-(!-~h!_Fe~_!.or_~_Q_acres _Q._sha;-~-P~-~-_!lcr& ______ Water Supply This is one of two ditches diverting from the Colorado River above the entrance to DeBeque Canyon and some 20 miles above the main irrigated areamong the river. These ditches have been administered from the Glenwood Springs office by the Water Commissioner for Water District 45 who lives in DeBeque. There is very little in the way of historical diversion records under this ditch, as there has always been ample water available for these priorities. Measuring gages were required in 1970 and good monthly records of diversions are available since that time. This ditch has a staff gage and flume located several miles below the diversion. Water represented by 80 shares of stock is diverted above the measuring point. The association also claims a junior water right for 12.5 cfs of water, and may issue additional shares to cover this water. W-i38 PROJECT SUMMARY SUPPLEMENT 88 Rev. 6 7 5 NAME OF COMPANY OR DISTRICT_ J!lu_es_to_ne_ D!t'=h _As!Joc:ia_tign _ _ __ LOCAT10N __D~Be~qu~, Qol~ra~o _ _ _ _ W,Q. __7£ _ AVERAGE SEASO.NAL SUPPLY 19 71 TO 1974 Apr. May. J~n. July. Aug. Sept bet. Total Total "- of Water A t I Eff ecf· Full Supply 1.0 c uo i '+le Suoolv Closs 5.14 4.00 100 I 0.9 a a 0.7 Ctl u'- a~ <( 04 .; e.l 0."'1- CL ...,: 0.~ lL. 0.2 ·r·,:. ~ •'. " 0.1 1,; ~ Seasonal Supply m Acre Feet Per Acre -.:t "" co 0 co co co 0\ Closs ~~~~~11+~~~11+11~~~~~+4~~~~~4-~~~-+-~~r+~~~~-r~~~~~r+-r4 Z~4-~~+4~~~~~~~4-~~~~+4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .,. ..L t»... ·U ~' "'' ' '; <{ .+·~~~~~~~~~~4-~~~~~~~~4-~~~~r+4-~~~~~-r~~~~,_~ .z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4-~4-~~~~~~r;-r~~~~~r+~~ BASIS OF SUPPLY DATA · Delivery to the land BASIS FOR CLASSIFICATION· 40 shares for 40 acres Estimated overage form requirement for full supply 4.00 acre ft. per acre. Main canal losses 40 " Lateral los$es ~ Diversion requirement full supply 6.67 acre ft. per. acre. 89 FORM R·l 08 IRRIGATION COMPANIES AND IRRIGATION DISTRICTS WATER DISTRICT NO. __72__ _ REV. 11-ee Bluestone Ditch Association WATER SUPPLY acre feet ACRES PER ACRE YEAR IRRIGATED April May Jnne July Aug. Sept. Oct. TOTAL DIV. DEL. Little diversi on data is avai able p~ ·ior to 1970 as there ~ ~s no mea sur 1-ng fltm e requi ~"ed - am tple wat4 r avaiJ able. 1971 2000 978 2.061 3.366 3,241 2.884 2,332 2.130 16,992 8.50 5.10 72 1,276 2,803 3,506 3,364 2_,_743 1,823 1,852 17,367 8.68 5.21 73 -- 1~702 2.884 3.401 3!t032 2,379 2,353 15.751 7.88 4.73 74 555 2,443 3,858 2,204 3,006 3,636 2,787 18,489 9.24 5.54 75 2000 - 1.675 2.884 3 509 _3__._914 _!J 162 3 .86.8__ _20,012 10_£.0_0_6. o_o - 76 - 3 460 3 .. 659 3.984 _2_.._907_ 2 944 2 R2R 19.782 9 .89 5.93 77 1.055 2.872 3 124 3 .866 3 551 3. 53~--- 2..,803 __ _2o_,aos_ 10_.40- 6.~ 78 - 1 156 3 318 1 Q76 3 .£.64--- __J ';~[,. 3 r:..?7 lQ 195 ~6_Q_ __ 5J..6 79 - 1.420 3 .. 596 4 124 4 215 3:705 3.789 20.849 110.42 6.25 --- ------ Ave (] 971-74) 702 2 .. 253 3.403 3.052 2 .. 916 2 .. 542 2 .. 280 17 .. 150 Ave.D:I v/ac. 0.35 1.12 1.70 1.53 1.46 1.27 1.14 8.59 AVE. I eliv/ac. 0 .• 21 0.67 1.02 0.92 0 .. 88 0 •. 76 0 68 5 .. 14 • BASED ON NORMAL OUTSTANDING SHARES AT 40 SHARES FOR_4_0 __ ACRES Diversions less estimated 40% waste and loss. 90 EAST PALISADE IRRIGATION DISTRICT The East Palisade Irrigation District was apparently organized on April 14, 1908 to embrace an area of well developed orchard land on the south side of the Colorado River just southeast of the town of Palisade. The area is known as the Vineland area and included about 610 acres. Court decree of 7-22-1912 granted Priority 7-renumbered 192-to the East Palisade Irrigation District Ditch in the amount of 10.20 cfs. Diversion was from the south side of the Colorado River near the east side of Section 10-TllS-R98W by means of a steam powered pumping plant. This system was used for about 10 years after which time the diversion was abandoned and the water right transferred to the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District which has served the area since about 1935. Former reports on the East Palisade Irrigation District show bonds were voted in the sum of $26,000 in 1908 and $15,000 in 1909 for a total of $41,000, all of which have been paid. The district voted to dissolve· and become a part of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District, and assumed part of the 40 year contract with the United States. The Vineland area is an old well established orchard area lying at the extreme east end of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District. There are some 590 acres involved which lie upstream from the pump and power plant of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District and water is delivered by gravity. The East Palisade Irrigation District is covered under the discussion of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District since the area is now a part of that district and the water right has been transferred. \'1-136 91 ENGINEER-APPRAISER PRO ,.JEC T SU!t.ri.AR Y D~ te ___.J.3IU!3l:Y 197 0 A I dent if i cation: WD-42 Stat e _ _Q.Q_l:.Q!'Jid.9____ Coun t y __t:f!!~£1, ______'''J thcr __ .D.. .. G. Hend..e.r.s..a.n..._ __ I Name & address__ Me~Count;y_:~:;:r~!l_t;.ion .Pi§_t~:!~_t; ______Previous reports(date & author): 2 __§ t~~-!?-~!:£.h._!_;;__ dis t~!!>~~il!g__ c:_l!~~! ______Yr. or ;ani zcd_t~Q6 __1:_942~rif_{iil ______3 Form of organ i za t i on_Q"£&_anize§__ _e_;.!.~!"_ic.t__!.9_LJ2FOi~~J:~------_l_9..J.I=Q£if f~~~l.ll,.a.. __ 4 Location s ~rv 1c e area_ W~..§.t __Q.f_..Eali.sruie.:-.ho.th_.side.s._Higbline _____ ~I \l s s of ser v • ce (mark with § 5 No. acrl:'5: ,~r oss _____,2...,_4QU ______nd_2_.,_Q_QO_.ittig_._~.u::. t 11 ~ ·--2-~W---- Dr a ina gc______6 ------Flood protcct1on ------__ 7 Location of rccords_D.iJ!i:.I'J...~J:--s,e_~. .'[.e_t~x.y_i_u_..f.C!l_i_~ade,_ __Cp_lQ.t"_~_cJo__ D1rcn flol'. ___ --~- ~J:~r I j I i' : o:;~:;~=RQ.n~----PAr~~-ili~=ar.;a=bit~~~ili&hlimi=~aMi= ~'upo ~::~:::a~:~.--·- I--1 l I 0 -~Jl.U.ld_b_a_s..ery.e_d_jzy:_..tb.e_Gnnd__\lal.ley:_.E.ro.j_ec..t... _____ ------I r r i 'J • c "r· r • .- :· :.. t ,. '·' • ______~ ll ------··-----·--·-- (1 t ~.r-r ------L __ i B Appra i r.a I & Loan Standards: Un 1 t ')i ~sscs~.mr:rd _ _dis.tx:_ic..k_a.c.r.e.______, I rixed chilrgcs: O~M __$.5_._z_s __ ~_l;__ ,S_l_<;_.__; 8!.1 _____ ~------"n'' ;---~---~ ~.::->~~··. -:- ..• ,~·.~rr1•r': '~rc 2 Add 1 tiona I to I I s_A,J;:.e~§--3~~~-~e,9__ 1JMeJ"Jhe_.G_J;_~n_cl__.J_t,m,_cti_Q_~------1 i_:_:,:: ____ ~-----'-~:!_:_.s_t· __ .:.2!:: __ _ 3 _P.!.C!in'!g_c;._D_i_s t..r_i~ t _Q._6_9._m.:llls._9JLY-~l_y_a t_i_qg._ ~n..J.9.9_·2·.. ) ____ ---;-__ ,·:, ,...... ~.5_._0.9_ ~ .._t2~- -~ _,_Q9. 4 Dr a ina gc c I .1 s s' f 1: ·1 t i on_G.9.QQ__ Q.l) __ f;.c!l§_t;_~r.n_l1J!li __ t;g__ f.!i.J,J~'-c~Jl.d__ p.Q.Qb"_ -~J.l_ __ ' >I ______1______5 _§Q.Q.t.§__ g.n__wg_~t~ill._J,l~..r..t ... ______------r" I!: , ~ __ f) \'Ia tcr supp I y r ding: _A_~t:~.§.._b..QlgJ..ug__c;l_i._§.ttig_t__r.igb.t.s. __ _c. i ~ !- _, ____ L ______~ ,"!: :. ______L __r ______ l ------~------~------· ______.... __ ------8 Evidence of users' rights, for loan CIOSing __ ~iUi-~Ji~Ji~Ji-lUld~Jr_Jl_~-tr~~-ll~_JihO~D_jp~------9 _rer;_grq_in_Qff~__ o.f._C.o.lillt.LAB_$.e,..a..s.o..r._2L..di.s..tx.i.c_t_.s_es;x.e.t1tt:Y..JL------I 0 Loan poI icy restrict; ons _ _llQil_E~::~Jm~j_deJ::._i}_n_..c.as_e__ 'bfiJiiL._I_e.II!LlJ.mi:.t.~g__ by __ Qrcha~~L..RQJ..i~y __ _ I I _g§_t~.b~i.WJ.e,d_ _in__~I_l\UA.l_.a.ta..n®.r.Qs_s.tudMs..______ 1 ? Genera 1 : _EM.tex:n....halL.nL.a.t:e.a._i.s.._a._ga.a.cLleruiing_a.x:.ea_whi~e.-w.e.s.t.ern__erui_i.s_.o_nlY----- 13 _f~r_JiuSL_~-d~~-~~d-~dl_l~_JO_f_Jiey~l~t~------ ======~======~=====~=~==~~======~==~====;:=--====::===-=~ c Description of Service Area Ei(·,. __~_,_~Q_Q_ __No. days frost-f~~".J76 Percent Pf-rccn t April 24 to October 18 I ______£r2Q~_£[_~lnE-~i_l~~E-H~£ __ --~£C£~ ______of_Er£~1- __ gf~! __t __ 2 -~!-~~]._fa ______30 _ 3 _Qrc:,t!-~~~------~.Q_- 4 ~or_!! __~_!lsila_g_~------· ______15 __ _ s _I rr i_g_.__!_E!_~ tur~------______2 0 __ _ 6 -~~!!__ Gr_~in_~------·---- __ 10 ___ 7 ------Misc. ------"-·------1.------5 8 State-county bx ratcs ______·------9 Community dcvc I opmcnt_j_.§_ge~l;y_ _go.o.d .. _s_o.me_neH.______ 1 o _hgu~in8- I 2 ------D Organization: Unit of asstt __.di&.tJ.:i~_.a,_cr.e______lndividuat I iabi I ity_Unl.imi..te,!i____ _ I Class fluthorizcd Outstandin_g Sustain, Par val. Mkt. va!. r-;o.farms 100 Av,sizc20•2~t.c. 2 M~;~=l;.o~.nty_t-.;:-~~iillf:t;-~C®tt_~~Jl--~~- -Gi=-- MQs_tJs=J!J.ll!':ll -RY t-_ti;jt_uni ts. 3 zatiQ..Il.L_A.ll_ ttessme.nt _arJL . . Q dit:e.C. y___apj. t______Tcnancy __ ~Ofi. ------4 _the l~nd_,_ __ ------·-··--- _____ ------____ NBtion31ity~----- 5 Managemcnt_!.§__§~_ti.if.l!~..t.ory. ------E 0 per at ion a I F ac i I it i cs~i.n8-.1U!l..nt_~~~ Grand YJJ..~~..h;:_~c t~ _.s_typ_l)i_t_~b__ 1 _cov_ers land ab.Q.y§_..Highline .J;.maLo.f.._U...£a.li~....b.e.l9ll._Highlilu:....c&n...uJ~IY.e~ 2 .llY....&t:.rodJ:.L fiQIU..RJ:Qj ec t cana,L_~.flumes f1:.mn....S.ty.h....lli.t&ha... ______ 3 ------4 Spec ia I const .hazards_ _.NQne of a s.eti®s...na.tllr~..d~i-lllij:_plWP_Qp_e_'[!tt.e.9_by__ the __ s Grflnd Valley }!LQ.jjt~.t_-llP.P~..i .in goQ.d_,e_QD~QD.._------F Projc-ct Finances Annual av. ______:Expense, before 8&1 or dep'n $------1 Condition as of----""------Dcpln actually charged $ ______(fst.futurc ~------' 2 Capital debt:----~ $-=---Income: Scr. $ ______Other $______Total $______3 Payable to Ass't ratcs:O&M__$5....2.5__B&I __= ____ Tota I...... SS,...2.5 __Collcction history: 4 De I i nqucnt $ _Coll_!:!.£tion _histoJ;".Y_q~_QeE!_n_ggod. __.4!.!.~!Sments levied s unmatured $__ _l>y_9ounty Assessor and collected with _s;eneral taxes_.___ _ 6 Current I iabi I itics $____ ------·- 7 Current assets, good $____ Debt hi story Faxa~~lg~------·------~- 92 ENGINEER-APPRAISER PROJECT SUMMARY - 2 IRRIGATION SUPPLEMENT ~-137 Name_ G ~ater Sources & Rights: Acre- ft. normal Decrees, permits, etc. I _ Name of source ~~~~!~~~i£~~-.~~~---l1£~------_f~i£~i1t __ ---~~£~~! _____ !£~-~~~£~~~ 2 _go l;grado _B.l:.Y~J.:. ______~------· ~--:6..~l.9_Q.J:.EQW_e.L ___ --~93_(81._. __6.21-.Q_Q_ ___ ------=----- 3 ------______Z.-:§_·:19. OJ~~tr_u.,___ ._ _l9J_(6)__ ___ 4Qt.Q.9______2.6JiQ______4 _.(!>.!.ve~~ ions__ i-n<:.l.Y. 1 =--======lt£~~======~--s£~~2n i~1~i===~;E=M_] Agr~==r=hl!~==J-~~~£-=r=~~ly_=[=6~;~==~=-~~~i~=J=Q£1:=J==N~Q=== 2 General project rating: :.c. ft. per <1crc Distribution in ac. ft. pr:r acre 3 4 5 6 ::::::bl~:;;~;~~:~~~~:ii=~~~~~~~~1~~~~~!~f~~f~~~~ 7 E ff oct i" de I i very___ ------e-latl'r~tl m _car:z::ilage._:tl:b._llil:h._i~i!e__1 ------9 Rating: %J..9_Q. __ cl _ _l__ to the land absorbed by the landowner. 9 s.~sis of appraisal: (supply) Ac. ft. per_fl_c;__ Di5tribution in percent of Sf';JSOn tobl :~ ::::=-..=---=::--=::::::::===-- -::::==----==---::::::::::_--::::j __ J IT,f__::i~itJ_::::±=!li:==~i===ILi=Io-t======J Gr.::phical Analysis of r:atcr Sup!Jiy: oasis of Supoly data ----~rqj~_Ct_de].._~y~_;:y-_ _1~~-~~p-~------.. - Basis of per acre deliveries and classificJtion- __Co:m_bi~~g __ c!_~li;_y~-~-q!_J1~§_f! _ _!£Q~!!.1;y__ :t_'f!'_~_pj._f!_!:_,_, ___ _ and Palisade Irrig. Dist. Normal Supply vs Desirable Dist Seasonal Supply - Acre Ft. per Acre Class Months of the Season Years as above 93 :oRM R-1 08 IRRIGATION COMPA~1ES AND ffiRIGATIO!': DISmicrs lEV. 11 •615 WATER DISTRICT NO. 42 Mesa County & Palisade Irr. Dists. - WATER SUPPLY Delivered to laterals-acre-feet ACRES PER ACRE YEAR IRRIGATED April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. TOfAL DI\'. DEL. 1959 7,353 1.467 5 327 5 234 5 096 4 701 1 691 2 319 29 .._81!1_ ..!L_Q6 60 7.356 2.263 5 102 5 189 5_.__6B3. 5 sso 3 .46R 2 971 30 •..126 4.JJ.9 _61 7 ..ll24 2 1'51 I) 111 s 1)11 .'5 841:) 5 111 ? '1?R 2 107 28 792 1 RR 62 7.389 2 895 5 226 5.457 5.695 _i 1RO 3 ".759 3 038 31 .450 4 26 63 7 .410 2 890 5 557 5 288 5 154 4 C)l)2 4 21)2 1 396 31...-48.9_ ~.25 64 7 200 2 094 6 064 ~,..1.12 6 121 7 Q12 .1:) Rl 0 'i.343 42 203 1:).• _8.6 ·--r------· - J965 7 080 1 197 5 97{+. 7 096 7 360 7 1:)04 4 464 1 R?1 37 416 r:; 28 2 RCJ1 h 66 6.880 495 6 633 7 151L r-_6.. .•B11 I)~_Q_ _4,..722 _ _ 4.0,.004. f-- ·- - .-.5 .. 8.0 67 6.1 lr._3Q_ __·_-_6.31) 68 6 580 2 010 5 500 5 795 6...,2.5_0 5 ll 0 4 770 4 f17'i 34 .. 110 15 1 R 69 1970 4,200 678 3,840 3,719 4,071 3,864 2,683 2,579 21,416 s-:fo 71 4,200 2,521 3,284 3,302 3..,563 3,322 2,446 2,096 20,096 -----4-:-89 72 4,400 3,248 3,810 3,820 4..!.010 3,954 2,844 1,845 23,531 5.36 73 4,200 1.090 3,827 4,202 4:~.364 4,492 3,427 2,847 24,249 5.77 74 4,000 901 3,599 3,590 3,694 3,739 3,022 2,252 20,797 5.20 1975 4,460 649 3,337 3,444 3 ._410 3.586 2.963 2.292 19,681 -- 4.41 76 4,400 1.694 3,290 3,191 3,552 3 .. 388 2 .. 859 1.827 19..,801 4.50 77 78 4,160 360 3,676 3,805 4,070 4.034 3,290 2.475 21,710 5.22 79 4,000 - 2.904 3._494 3 .. 898 3 Rlt; ~ 327 2 227 19 .666 4.jj ----~------~-----+------r-----1------r----~------r-----,_------t------~------~-----+------r-----1------r----~------r-----,_------~------ ------l-,,..------l----+-----+--·-·l-----+-----+-----4-----+------i----·---·-- l I ' .1 ; .. I A-.v-e--.--~-· -;-~-~;a·"""·6_·_.-'c.,.:._J__2--,-4-~h-O..:,.__c;_.6_1_00-+--5-·--g-so I ~-0-'iO 1~5 Q.'iO .,-;;· ??0 I 1 r,ool" 14-~-Qf}:----r.---<;D -- • ~ I ! ! I : . :\VE./~cre 0.34 0.78 0.83 0.84 0.83 0.59 0.50 . 4.83 ! acre from District records. • BASED ON :"\0£01:\L OUTSTANOI;\G sns:m~~1QtXXXXXXXXX~KXRKK:t:~ Diversions for both districts are combined since they are measured at the same point-Price-Stub Pump. 94 Mesa County Irrigation District - cont. General History The Mesa County Irrigation District, comprising about 2,400 acres, embraces a strip of land from one-fourth to one-half mile wide and ten miles long, lying on both sides of the Highline Canal of the Grand Valley Project-U.S.B.R. It is bounded on the north by the Stub Ditch, which is the distributing canal of the Mesa County Irrigation District, and the Price Ditch of the Palisade Irrigation District. The District was organized in 1906 and shortly there after issued bonds in the amount of $188,000. After experiencing some finan cial difficulty, the last of the bonds were retired by the district in November 1937. The Stub Ditch, or Mesa County Irrigation District Canal, formerly diverted from the north side of the Coloradp.River near the east line of Section 3- TllS-R98W-6th P.M. by means of a hydraulically operated pumping plant. Con siderable difficulty and expense in maintaining the power canal and pumping plant lead to a joint contract between the Mesa County Irrigation District, the Palisade Irrigation District and the U.S. Government on May 18, 1931 whereby the Government agreed to divert and convey in the Highline Canal the water to which the Districts were legally entitled to divert for irri gation. The agreement with the Mesa County Irrigation District called for the Grand Valley Project to pump not to exceed 15 cfs of water into the Stub Ditch for the use of district lands lying above the Highline Canal and the remainder is to be released directly to farm laterals at sixteen different headgates along the Highline Canal. No water is to be delivered before March 20 or after October 31 except at such times as the Highline Canal may be running water to the Grand Valley Project-U.S.B.R. In addition the D'istrict authorized the Government to carry in the Highline Canal for such uses as it may see fit the 627 cfs of power water formerly utilized for pumping purposes. Under terms of the contract the District assumed no obligation in connection with the Grand Valley Project except for a carrying charge for delivery of their water. Water Supply Court decree of 7-22-1912 granted Priority 8-renumbered 193-dated 7-6-1903 for 40 cfs to be used for irrigation and 627 cfs for power to pump the irrigation water. The change of the point of diversion from the Palisade Mesa County Diversion Dam to the Highline Canal was approved by the court in the general adjudication of 7-25-1941. As indicated, part of the water for the Mesa County Irrigation District is delivered to the Stub Ditch by the Price-Stub Pump, which is located a few rods from the southwest portal of Tunnel No. 3 on the SW~ of Section 3-TllS-R98W-6th P.M. The Price Ditch is considerably lower than the Highline Canal at this point, which provides a convenient drop to develop the power needed to pump the Mesa County Irrigation District water from the Highline Canal up into the Stub Ditch. In actual practice then, the Government does not use the 573 cfs of power water owned by the Palisade Irrigation District nor the 627 cfs of power water owned by the Mesa County Irrigation District. Officials believe, however, that the word ing of the contract and the physical fact of power use by the Government have kept these power appropriations in force and immune from possible 95 Mesa County Irrigation District - cont. action for abandonment. In other words, if the contract with the Govern ment should ever be terminated, the Districts could rehabilitate their power canal, install new turbines and pumps, and provide their own water. Project Assessments The Mesa County Irrigation District has no bonded debt or construction obligation. The only expense is a carrying charge for delivery of water by the Grand Valley Project under the contract with the U.S. Government. This assessment is currently $5.25 per project acre with some 2063 acres shown as being assessed. The project acreage is also included in the area of the Grand Junction Drainage District which levies a mill tax on all taxable property within the district, including municipalities and railroads. The levy for drainage in 1969 was 2.69 mills on a total valuation of $66,822,523. Levies for both the Mesa County Irrigation District and the Grand Junction Drainage District are certified to the County Assessor in the fall of the year for inclusion on the tax rolls along with the general property tax. Conclusions The Mesa County Irrigation District is considered to have a full Class I water supply. The assessment for Operation and Maintenance is $5.25 per acre, which charge is levied directly against the land under a contract with the U.S. Government for delivery of water. There are no general engineering restrictions on loans within the district area. Consideration should be on a case basis using the policy on orchard properties where applicable, and paying particular attention to drainage and degree of development on each unit. \'/-136 96 ENGINEER -APPRA 1SER PROJECT su:.~rU.RY D at e ____-!.~!l.Ua!_y_.!2_ZQ ____ A I cient if i c 5 ~~ o. 9 ;:~;~~~~===ng.ne=-~-======~======~======S u PP 1Y Gr oun ~w ;J ( '· r __ ~--= ~~~~~ I 0 ------·--·-···------I rr i 9. carr 1 r~ S·~·r ,, ·------~ I I ------··-·------0 t hc·r ------· !_._j 6 Arrr a i sa r & Loan Standards: iJ,-, 1 t d ?. s r. ~:: :,r,c·r.t_~t:-~19_Q._g_.( __ ~.§..§g_§_~_§_Q.. ..Y._t~J11a~j._QD_l.T9J;.~].__ 1_78 __m_!.J._ls} I Fixed chuJcs: O!.M_~~-!..JQL_~l_QQ__ "lal_.; E61_i4.!_;3_Qj_il__9_Q_y~_l.1 ___ ,·r.:II_~90Q_ Co:;t~: per su'.l:l"''"1 .;.:~l' 2 Add 1 t ion" I to I I s_if9_ac_L_j._I),_~_C!§j:_~rn _e4_gg_-:_'\[j__n~1_~I],Q__ ~r-~a-i,_~-----·------~ j_:;_: __ .• ..f:.~.!------~~i_~----::;: __ ; ~~J!.~~- ======;:=-======~===:;======~=-======:======:======c Descript1cn of Service Area [ l<'v.465Q=485_0_No. days frost-fr'!c-_1.76 Percent PC'rccnt April 24 to Octaher 18 I ---~!:.Q.Q~_£!:_~j_~~-E.Ll!~~~E.£__ --A c r.~~------.2.L.9.C.2~.L __ £_L~!'J_ ------2 Or CQ_!l_~Q§______------+------____ §_Q__ ~; c ,- T .• pr c c i p: tot a I u nn u a 1__ ~,!} ____ i r • 3 A1 £~1.~~------______?JL_ _A._pri 1-Q~ tQp~;:-aver !--2.~5 .;.!!.!._ 4 Cor~------~------__ 1 0---- T 0 DO 2. •, d t i n3_1evel__ to _,!_Q!].._:!.:g.g ____ _ 5 Sugar_J~e~t§______·------___ .2____ 1J:R:l~!lJ!_are~ __ sout!LQ_f_.Qp_~Q.!_~Q2 6 Mi~£..----·------~------___5 __ _Ri '[_er_.______7 ------· ------L-.-.------~------Ora in'!ge.MQAtly_pj!_tura]._dr_~in_~ 8 s t J t e-county tax r at c s ------·------_Qy__arr gy:a~..,__li!_t_l} __;_tEW_Qp_~n__d rains 9 Cor.~mun it y dcvc I opmt"nt_js general!Y_&Q.QQ_,_~.Q_me_Q~_yelQp_-:._ _Q!l_We_!!_t_ e~fl_-:_Q,!.!_tr!_ct_ _provided • 10 ment_ taking place,_.n.~ hop1~§.... b~ing__c;g..n§tt:_lJ;Ct;.~-- Sci 1 s & prodtJct i vi tyJ~_.ec!_!!lesa_!m_ __ 1 1 etc ~. __Black tQR._Ipag~__ ,t,b._"J;:Qyghou.t.,J;b-_~-~.J.:.~!l with ___ _tg__gl".!l.Yi.§JL~-~-lt!t~-g~n~r a !1Y 12 S!~_L§ig~_rgads_t._~_ll.. utilitie!!__availabl~----- _de..ru;L_~l,lg__p_!oductive. ______0 Organization: Unit of ass' t __.P.roj~L_a_c;_l;:~------~ nd i ,, i dua I I i ab iIi ty_yn!l-~ ..!=_~g ___ _ 1 Class Authorized Outstandino Su::.tain. Par val. M~t. val. No.fums300 Av.sizc 30 Ac. 2 ~ct1~,~f~~~e~st~~~ll80~~ts. 3 leyj.e4__c!.!L~ 1 ~.i.D.§ _t_qg__la •------Tenancy _ _lO% ______4------Nationalit.y_.4~;.ican_. ___ 5 Man a gemcnt_has _!t~~.IL.&9J~.9Ji!1£~Jlew_~.Q.IJ~ra~_t;__~bout 1922. ------Operation a I Fac it it i es...... Qrchar4Ji~J!_s.ip.hQn.._fi.9lll_Highlin~_-Can.l!!.~~rQ~§_9_Q_lo_,_~_iV~.!,.-:_ __ 1 ~c:,tangular C..Q.~..X.eJ:e s true turg__l!!__m....__lgng_ then_2 tn;,1 __Q.P~J! .. J-_ine4._ c~:Q.al__t County Irri EXPLA ATIO 8UA£AU OF Cl.AMU COMPUT£0 A 0 .I.UTHOAIZ£0 ._OAl(S CA.'w.AL FLUIIIE UITERAL. CONDUIT ORAl POWER PlAHT lU El. P\J PI PLANT SlPttCIM PROJECl HEADQUARTERS _: * __: AREA 8ENEF1TED BY PROJECT WOR S L ------·---~------ ------''----- ---- - 2·• J L__ ~' -- l Mesa Irrigo Dislt;-_. ~ I . I . I I -- -.' _L_~_-__ ~ UNITEO STATES OEPARTME T OF THE I TERIOR FRED A SEATON SECRETAR BUREAU OF RECLA' ATIO F LOYO E OOMI Y CO ISSIO ER GRAND VALLEY PROJ CT ESA COU TY , COLORADO IREGION 4 1 lot P NO. 8 · 40 0 - 9 SCAl.E 01' I L£5 JU ( 1951 97 ENGINEER-APPRAISER PROJECT SUMMARY - 2 IRRIGATION SUPPLEMENT W-137 G \'!ater Sources & Rights: Acre- ft. normal Decrees, perr;;its, etc. I ______!:!~.£.!~~!".£!____ 2-~~.i~E.~.Q~~- ______.!..!.£~------_::!:.i2.Ci1~-- ___ £!~£~~.!. ____ 2.£!:_!2.2.:..:..£!.:.:..:: ~ ~c;~~do ~;~======~=~~~== :~~~~~=;~=;~=~~~~;: ~~~~;~~;~;~~;=~; ( [st. tot a I norm. annua I d i vcr s i ons ___ .QQ_,_Q.OO ------·------·l------7 E st. d i s t r i b. I o s s c s 3 0 %: n c t d c I I y---- 4 0, OQ_Q____ ------· ------8 Storage cap'y___ nQ!Le ____ A.F. Loc. pts.of diversion: Contests pending_-~911~------··------9 J!!yerted_jp~~rand V~!l~--~oj~--~~-l!]rery__ ------10 _taken~t head_gf_T\!~e!_N~~l!~-~QJ_~~------1 1 H ~~:~ M;~l:;:~-;;~~~:~~~~;;c~~=~~~=~~~j_e.cJ:._land_====~f~;,~~~--;~~;~-;-:~~~~~(;~~;-~::-;~~-- 1 Usual 1rrig.s0Json: from __~Pl:!! __ 15_to_ Oc~-~~~-~-!~ ___ lcngth___ !~-~------~~P~!)[_!~-BL~~~~-~11~-~ffect~y~ ? D0l ivcry schcdulc__ ~~~~l:-~~~!JJ[_~~~J-~~P-~~--~~-~~~~~~------~!-~~-~~~-l_!~J[-~~~~J_q~l:~~-jg9_~g~ ~ -~Q~9_\!8Q.ou t -~h~_A!:f>~!!.l.&_~ easE!!..!______·------.. ______------4 Entitlement per unit of intcrest_As~es~~9--Y~-~~~-~io]!_F_ased_9_~------5 ~iff~;ent~la~~~~~!_-~and-s_~~--~chedu~~-~QJlQWi~------6 Extent transferJble_~rte~~n~--~Q--~~~--!~ng______------Ouant it at i ve Ana I ys is of \':a ter Supp I y: based on_]?rg.iec_t;__!"_~CO_lZ.Q§______ I ======li£~~======~~-S£!~;n i£1!1-==~~[-M_] A£r~==[=M~~=:J-~~;£_:r=~~lx_=[=~~~==J[-~;El==]=O~l:-J: :;~~=== 2 General project rating: Ac. ft. per acre Distribution in ~ Sup pI y' :: :~: :.::======~:===-===-= 0, 5 ==== ::=j~==:::::~::l~::::::: =~=l:::==::: 5 tot a I ______D_._Q]_____ ~--- _Q_..5_L 1. 00 .Jl .. .2B, __ .l_._.Q5 ___Q_..9_6 ___Q..__8_l __ _Q.._] 0 ------6 D c s i r a b I c d c I i v cry------1---· 4. 50 ---- A 'hrm as _,S haHn~~ ia.s.ed_ ~lji_y:e~- .t..Q._.l.llW lQwn.e L----- 7 Effective de I i very______------1 ~ t't::~~,fo::aL_ox _c..an:.La..ge.__ ch_~th__c_ :n1ley.anf~~ .lo _s______9 Rating: %]._QQ___ c l _ _l__ to the land absorbed by the landowner. 9 Basis of appraisal: (supply} Ac. ft. per_~-~. Di~tribution in percent of crn~on total :~ =====--===-==---==--==L~ ±_u±:-!§j:::::v ±::::i~;::::]===g--..==~::::tl_±::::::::==~ J Graphical Analysis of V:atcr Supply: Basis of Supply data -__ R,roi~~-t;__deli_y~_!:'_y_l_~59_-:§J______Basis of per acre deliveries and classification - --~§_QQ_~9!_~~--~~riga_te9__ y!tg~F--~~-~-P-~QJL~~~------ Normal Supply vs Desirable Diat Seasonal Supply - Acre Ft. per Acre Class ;):~·p·~~ tnJ)~·~ r~~ ~~:~~r:~y) GR~VI~~ l r· >r~~ '~ ~R~~h ~' ~y: P~ Months ot the Season Years as above 98 Orchard Mesa Irrigation District FORM R-1 08 IRRIGATION COMPANIES AND mRIGATION DISTRICIS \\'ATER DISTHICT NO. 42 REV. 1 1-G6 Grand Valley Project \\'ATER SUPPLY Delivered to laterals - acre-feet ACRES PER ACRE YEAR IRRIGATED Anri.l Mav June July Aug. Seot. Oct. TOTAL DIV. DEL. 1959 7 .. 017 2.098 5 .. 991 6 .. 058 6 .. 584 5.585 4.128 3 .422 33 .. 866 4.83 60 6.713 2 .. 048 5.852 5.918 6.432 5.456 4.032 3.333 33.071 4.93 61 6.786 2.078 5.897 5.966 6.493 5 .. 531 4.077 3.381 33 .. 423 4.75 62 6 .. 734 2 .. 013 5 .. 777 5 .. 828 6.530 5.468 4.009 3 263 32.888 4.88 63 6.164 2 .. 637 6 .. 867 6 .. 939 7 .. 829 6.520 4.810 3.948 39 .. 550 6.42 64 6 .. 348 5 .941 7 .636 7 391 7_..212 7 212 7 .441 4.434 47,267 __ [_. !f!:J. .3~_Q_ 1965 6 .. 325 5 .. 850 7.635 7.380 7 .. 285 7.285 7.380 8 --~}-~135- ·- -· -~·· _7. 4_} •. 66 6.340 7 .. 380 7 .. 636 7.380 7 .. 637 7.636 7.380 7.637 52.686 8. 30 67 6 .. 005 4.930 6.430 5.520 6 .. 740_ ~_§_4_Q __ ·j-.5_.J>_2!> _ _J ,_2~0 41 ,_5_~0 6.99 68 6.761 2.915 6.285 6 .. 495 6.905 _2J0_5__ --4,630 __1_,_5.2Q_ f--_36 '555_ f--- -- 5.39 69 - 5.70 --f------1970 71 -----~··------~ 72 ------73 74 1975 6,805 520 6 .. 420 6 .. 570 7 .. 350 7.310 2.670 2 .670 35 .. 975 5_._3_0 76 6,850 3,100 5!1600 5!1500 5.650 5.500 3.700 1 .800 30 .. 850 4.50 77 6,815 4,860 5,650 5,640 5,190 4.890 4.340 1.610 32.570 4 80 78 6,940 1,170 5.490 6.330 6.440 5.860 4.230 2 .. 580 32 .. 100 4 .. 62 79 5,490 1,224 3,698 3,768 4,021 4,128 2,852 2,259 21,950 4.00 - Ave. -6,600 3,789 6,600 6,488 6,965 6.304 5!1354 4!1656 39,802 AVE./ jlc. 0.57 1.00 0.98 1.05 0.96 0.81 0.70 6.07 .Acre from Project Records • BASED ON NORMAL OUTSTANDING/~HXltlCJCIXX«__ AD93S{ Figures are delivery to landowners lateral or carriage ditches. 99 Orchard Mesa Irrigation District - cont. General Statement The Orchard Mesa Irrigation District comprises approximately 10,000 acres on the south side of the Colorado River in a strip one-half to two miles wide and 13 miles long extending from the town of Palisade to Grand Junction. All but about 600 acres in the Vineland area at the extreme east end of the district lies on a somewhat rolling mesa overlooking the Colorado River known as Orchard Mesa, to which irrigation water must be supplied by pumping. The Orchard Mesa Irrigation District was promoted, as of October 25, 1907, by residents of that area who preferred a system separate from the Grand Valley Project of the Bureau of Reclamation. The works consisted of a steel wicket dam one-half mile above the Grand Valley Diversion Dam; about 9 miles of canal in the canyon of Colorado River, of which 6 miles was in untreated timber flume; a pumping plant containing two turbines direc connected to pumps, one mile south of Palisade; two distribution canals, each about 15 miles long, to carry respectively 80 sf at a 40 foot lift and 60 sf at a 130 foot lift. Water was first delivered in 1910. In 1917 the wooden flume had almost completely decayed, the pumping plant was in very poor repair and the District proposed a rehabilitation of its works by the Bureau of Reclamation. The Bureau offered, at a cost of approximately $1,000,000 to rebuild the works to supply 800 sf from the project main canal, by means of a siphon under Colorado River, from the upper end of tunnel No. 3. During the irrigation season the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District was to receive 400 sf of this water for pumping and irrigation and 400 sf was to be used in the power plant of the Grand Valley Project, and the whole 800 sf was to be used in the power plant during the nonirrigation season. The Orchard Mesa dam and about 5.5 miles of its canal was abandoned. From the river siphon a canal in concrete bench flume extended for 1.57 miles to the Vinelands and the old canal was used for about 1.80 miles to the pumping plant. Four vertical direct-connected turbines and pumps were installed and the distribution canals rebuilt. Repayment Obligation The contract with the U.S. Government providing for rehabilitation of the project was executed on February 18, 1922. Progress began to be apparent and development of new land and planting of orchards continued at a favor able rate. A supplemental contract was negotiated in May 1931 providing for repayment of the remaining obligation of $959,214.55 in 40 annual install ments instead of 20 installments as provided in the 1922 contract. This supplement also provided for assessments to be levied according to the agri cultural productivity of the land based on 6 classifications. The acreage of the various land classes and the valuation assigned each class was established as follows: 100 -2- Value for Total Value for Class Type of Land Irrig. Purposes Acres Irrig. Purposes 1 Fruitland $100 per ac. 1,249 $124,900 lA Potential Fruitland 80 " " 502 40,160 2 Good Agri. Land 60 " " 3,900 234,000 3 Fair Agri. Land 40 " " 2,558 102,820 4 Poor Agri. Land 20 " 11 1,113 22,260 5 Temporarily Unproductive 0 " " 905 0 Total 10,027 $523,640 The contract provided that payments on the obligation would be made as follows: $15,932.63 on or before the contract was executed by the United States; on December 1 of each of the years 1931 to 1934, $15,000; on December 1, 1935 to 1939 inclusive, $20,000; on December 1, 1940 to 1944 inclusive, $25,000; on December 1, 1945 to 1965 inclusive, $29,921; and on December 1, 1966, $29,922.02. A moratorium was granted from 1931 to 1936 which extended the payments to 1971. Further extensions have been granted leaving some $250,000 due on this contract at the present time. In 1966 an additional contract was executed in the amount of $750,000 for the purpose of extensive rehabilitation of the irrigation facilities of the district. This contract called for repayment of $1,200 a year beginning in 1967, until the district's prior obligations to the United States have been amortized. Thereafter payments will be $31,200 annually. It appears extensions and deferments will extend the repayment period beyond the year 2000. The modern approach seems to be to defer as many payments as possible to the.end of the repayment period-especially since the obligation is non interest bearing. At the time of the execution of the new contract in 1966 the district had experienced several poor fruit crops. In 1967 the District board elected to revise the valuation of the various classes of land to place the fruit acreage in a little more favorable position for assessment purposes as follows: Valuation for Class :!YE_e of Land Irrigation Purposes 1 Fruitland $85 per acre lA Potential Fruitland 67 per acre 2 Good Agri. Land 67 per acre 3 Fair Agri. Land 55 per acre 4 Poor Agri. Land 45 per acre 101 -3- The present assessment rate for O&M and Construction Repayment (B&I) is 128 mills based on the valuation assigned for irrigation purposes, or $12.80 per $100 of assessed valuation. This amount is broken down for Operation and Maintenance (O&M) and Construction Repayment (B&I) as follows: O&M $8.50 per $100 of assessed valuation B&I $4.30 per $100 of assessed valuation The assessment per acre on each land classification on this basis is as follows: Class Type of Land Assd. Val/ac. O&M/ac. B&I/ac. Total 1 Fruitland $85 $7.22 $3.65 $10.87 lA Potential Fruitland 67 5.70 2.88 8.58 2 Good Agri. Land 67 5.70 2.88 8.58 3 Fair Agri. Land 55 4.68 2.37 7. 05 4 Poor Agri. Land 45 3.82 1.93 5.75 Water Supply The Orchard Mesa Irrigation District claims the following water rights: District Appropriation Amount Decree Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Remarks 192(7) 10-1-1900 10.20 7-22-1912 Irr. 197(9A) 10-25-1907 195.00 7-22-1912 Irr. and Pow. 197(9A) 10-25-1907 75.00 7-22-1912 Irr. 197 10-25-1907 130.00 7-25-1941 Irr. and Pow. 197 10-25-1907 50.00 7-25-1941 Irr. 360A 4-28-1914 100.00 7-25-1941 Irr. Priority 7-renumbered 192-was granted to the East Palisade Irrigation District Ditch which diverted from the south bank of the Colorado River on the E~ Section 10-TllS-R98W. Diversion was by means of a steam pumping plant to provide water for some 570 acres just east of the eastern edge of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District. This district, known as the Vineland area, has been a part of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District since about 1935 when they paid off all their indebtedness. Water is supplied by gravity from the Power Canal of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District. nte water right for 10.20 cfs has been transferred to the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District and the land pays the same assessments as the Orchard Mesa land plus an assessment for drainage under the Palisade Drainage District. Priority 9A-renumbered 197-was granted for 270 cfs with 75 cfs being for irrigation and 195 cfs for power to pump the 75 cfs. Court decree of 7-25-1941 increased the total amount of Priority 197 to 450 cfs with the same priority date, 10-25-1907, by adding 50 cfs for irrigation and 130 cfs for power to pump the water. 102 ~- The 1941 decree also granted Priority 360A for an additional 100 cfs with Priority Date of 4-28-1914 on the basis of a claim by the district that the system required an application of water to its land at the rate of one cfs of water to 40 acres of land. This priority is a very junior right and not considered as a necessary part of the district operation. \ The Orchard Mesa Irrigation District has historically had a full water supply, and should continue to be a generally good lending area with some precaution necessary on individual units where drainage or develop ment may be questionable. \'i-136 103 ENGINEER- AP PR A I S[R PROciEC T SUiMM,p Y [l at e _____ .Ji!D.l.Jilt'y_.JJ!.ZO____ _ A I dent if i cation: WD 42 S Ll te ___ C.9..lQ!'Ad.9___ C ounty _____ M.esg~.______Au thor __ D...._G_.____H.end.ez:s..o.n_ __ _ I Name & acidress __ _J;r~nd_yall_~--~~-t_e_~__ ij_§~r§_4,s~u,_, ______r·re·r~ous reports(date & auth~H·): 2 _.Qr ~!l_4._YJ!!]._~--~qj ec_t_Q.f_l.LLS__,Ji~RL ______Y r· . r, r ''-3" ; z P. r:! 1.2.13___ .l...9_Al::G.ti.f..fin______ 3 F or'!'! of or g an i 2 a t i on -~r a tin.g __ g_9_l;:Q.9T ~-~;hQJl_f.Q.~-.P-~9i~ ~-t~ _--·----- J..5J 3 2-:.GJ'J. f_fi n~u:_~ e~JJJ~-- 4 Location serv1::e are:! __ N.!, __q! __ Q'f..! __ J!J-_l!~J:J.._QJl_~QQY_~_9J:~!l.4..Y.ak1~1--- .. C:\ass of ser111Ct1 (r.-~::.r.: wr~:- ..:) ! N '~~:=~- ;c ~~:==~~~-====:~~==~]5_~~~~-~~ ~: .·~-~-·.: =:~~~~_:_::::= ~~:::' ~: :~: d ~~== t==~ ?t..ocat1o~ of rc-cords __W.a._tex__U.a.e.r_s__o.ffke __a_t_..S.O.O ... .S. .. _l.O.th . ..S.t...._,.___ f:1rr-• flu ____ ..x_ 1 1 s _Gnnd.Junc.ti.on,._.C.O.lo.r.ad!L..815..o.L______·,·, ' '-' :;t,r;;~r· - : __ :----~ 9 0 v cr I a p 5 ____ ...none______.. ___ ------S u PP \ Y Cr o u r1 :· ... ~ •_ v ··. ___ i- ---! 10 ------·------·------I r r i CJ. c :. :)pr 1 is a I & Loan S tanrJar d~: L:n 1 • -Jf as sc c; s~r.•n t __. .R.rOi~~-~--~c;_~~----·--·------·· ------·-·--- ____ _ 1 Fi,.-c-a chuac!:l: O!-M __4_!.Q_Q_p_er __!!£_;"e_; 8~1 __.J,..!_4_9 _ ___:Qg_!___~£:;1;.§. _____ 1.;-ti! __ .f_Qj.5 Co·>t·: ;:.(·;- c'J'; 1 ·,r. r-: ·:.-·. 2 /. ;j d I t I c n i! I t c I I s none : ~ ·~ ~~ :.. . . . ' : ,, : ;;:~~:~~-~~~~:~~~~~~on :~I!~~~i~~~i~~ t~~=~~i=Yii{~~=i~;;~~== ::;----t~~~iji~~{~~ 5 _good __t:_Q_.£.QOt:_ de..Qel!Qillg__q_n__ ~Q~Ji tj.on_ _c~:rtd _Q~y~_l_Qp_II!~Il_t;.L. ______r o 1 1 ~. 11: l ____ _ ~ \';a tc-r supp i i rat 1 n3: ~_9_!__~§__Q.9_~Qj.JYL.R.~.9j_eq_t_ r:hght§______c: I:! ss ___I.._. ____ T vta: .. S~_QQ__ 5.. .._49:.2_,_7_5 7 _Wa teE_..!:!.&h~- bas ~_Q__ g.n__Q.!_'[~ __<:,; § __fo_:r_~_~ch -~Q-~c ~~§.._j.n __!::h~--E.rQi~~-1;_.______------·---· 8 E v 1 c 1 1 c l o~ 1 n g___ dcnc of users rights 1 for can _!Lcref!_ il_Lp_roje c_t;______ 9 ------1 o Loan p o I i c y r c s t r i c t ; on s __N O!_l_~ __Qb\~!~JJ c~t i Q!J.__ Q ~-..:the __§~ curi_!:_y__!l_l-'!Q __t;_~~_9-~_]._Q.~IL~.9--Q~-- \ 1 _c!~ t~~l.~_cLg_I,L_!L£AS e_ b~_s_i~-'------·------·------__ _ I? Genera I: _Qenet:..CllJ..Y a good _giyer_ulie.d...MJ~.9.. ..Hi.t:.hJU:a.i~gg_ aJ;lii__ d~xel_QlUltt;.Q~ __ vst:nrJ.ng__ 13 co_!l._~_i,9e!]l_Q.ly_frQ.nL2n.e_y._n:j,._t__ tQ__ E!Mthe.I_. ______c ~c~~~~~~7:~=:~-;:~~~~: Arc:======~======~~=====~===-==-~~~~==-~~~~~o:=:~:~·-·::~: fr~~~~~;:~-l76 Percent Pu·u:nt Aeril 24 to October 18 I ---~~.2£E._£~-~j__Q_!L.2i_J..!!!.!L~E~-- --~£!:£~-----E.L.9!:.21.L __ QL.Q!'l___ --·------··------·- .. -- 2 Al.f.Al.fA______------____ ..JQ__ r;crm. prr:c 1 p: tot a I i.lnnu;.:l __ !3_!..~---- i r'. 3 Corn_~__ tp_sil~------______2.6__ ~_p_ri_l;_-O_c:_toP.._~!"-~ver ·-~.!)..6 ..!.~~-- 4 SugaJ;:_,Be~ ts ------____l5____ To po g. set t in 9_!.ev~!_-~.!!.9..E~~s_ ___ _ s Irr.!.g..e-~!--~turL ______·------______].2 ___ !>~~=.!!.-~_!ld_?.J21and_cu~~-~~1-.! € §~l!_9r!-J.n§___ ------______8 __ washes. 1 Mi§s:~------______.2.__ ~~:~ 3:=s~_fe~--~!- op!:_n d:ra_~ils__ 8 $ t ::d C - C CU n t y t E Opcrat i ona I F ac iIi t i cs_Su'f2§[email protected]_ _Rorks_~ th_«LColg]:'ad_9_~_:h_ye;_J;_j~Jn __f:_l!!J8l with 1 initial capacity of 1650 cfs, three _tunnels in first __q__!!lA1:es __ with_1~ngths_qJ 3723, 2 1655 and 7290 feet respectivel~Some 55 miles of ma.!_~_sa~l witq_~xtensive_!ateral 3 and drainage systeJJYL tq_.§~rre the proj,!!.£.t are£!.!_Mof!!...P!'.9Jllem_are~_ar~_JJJled_._ __ _ 4 Spec i a I const. hazards __.SQ.tne problem wtt:.h_ii_:lYllli.2.tL struct;.tJ:r~_!-nc! __tun~].-~~-l~------lU4 ENGINEER-APPRAISER PROJECT SUMMARY - 2 IRRIGATION SUPPLEMENT W-137 Name_ Grand Valle_y__WC!_~er_Users_b.ssn'!-______..:. __ G ~ater Sources & Rights: ~ere- ft. normal Decrees, permits, etc. ______!±~~£__ 0 f 2~!:.£.£ ______!~~l~!:~.2~~- ______.!.1.£~------_:.cl2!:i .1~-- ___ !:.~.2;:~..!. __ --_i...£!: .. ~.::.:.~::!:.!:.~ 2 __g~_l:_or_~do __ gj._y:~,!' ______l-20, QQO ______]._98.::!r~!g_.______~.:--~Z.:-_l:.~Q~ ___?_~.9-~Q.9 ____ _?5 ..t..ooo __ _ 3 40 Domestic 2-27-190f 220.00 domestic ------· ·------,.------4 ------__1:! __ g~_!ll· --~~~E-- ~-=--~Z -1:_9 O_f ___'±_Q.9_~QO --~-~E.!....E~_E_!~< s ------41 Com.------Power ·------2-27-190f ------1------800.00 ~on-Irr. 6 Est. total norm. annual diversions __ 220,0QQ ------1------1------7 Est. d i s t r i b. I o s s c s 56 tf,: n c t dc II y----~ 00____ ------8 Storage cap'y_ _IUl~ ____ A.F. Loc. pts.of diversion: Contests pendin? ___ p_~U~------9 J2iY~~Jdi..jj(Qrnl_~b~Jlk__ CQ~Q. __a!)L~f--iD .. ~~------1 o .Seh-13-.I.l.Q.S. -R9_8W-Q_th_:f-'J1 ... ______------II 1 H Us e r s 1 En t i t I em en t s : Un i t of 1 n t ere s t _g~_tg__ Q.f .. .l!r.9.i~..9-t .. J.J!!J.A_ ------..§en e: n. r ~ f r <. t i v cr. t s ::: ( : ~.; ;: n • ~ c: ~) ~ : • I Usual irrig.season: from~~-~l __i2__to_JQC~QQ~-~-J5 ___ 1en?:h ___ !_~~------~~~!J[_j_~j-~l!J[_e(f~-~ti~e--~~- 2 De I i very schedu I c__ F_ ~ Supp I Y' ::::: :.~::::::=: ===-~~--=-===-=: ~. :~- =~~~ ~~:~~~=:_::e=:~~j:=:. ~~:~ =:~-~:1:::==::: 6 Des i r a b I c d c l iv~~------·-3-:-85____ ----Q72Q" --0 • 65 -~ • 80- -Q~BS- --0:-acr --0:40- -0:13 ------Effec ~1'vc dcll'very ______3.85 ______o.2o"(f.-6s~·-o-.so- o--.85 ___0_.80 --cr.?+o- o:-r.s ------7 L Y------·------· ------8 Rating: %_l:_Q_9___ c 1__ ,! __ 9 B~sis of appraisal: (supply) Ac. ft. per~~- Di~tricution in percent Qf ~~~son tot~l I O ------_j__j__d__ j ____±------l------l-----'------1 1 ------______j __ ~_j __ 2 o__ _j]___ L__~l__ -~Q. ___ __!Q _____ --~-- L------J Graphical Analysis of \'later Supply: Basis of Supply data -__ j2el_!_y~~Q__land __l_25.l.-=69 ______Basis of per acre del ivcrics and classificJtion - ~oject~-~~2Q~OO__tg__ ZJL~O{tQ_~~--Jl~~~------ Normal Supply vs Desirable Diet Seasonal Supply - Acre Ft. per Acre Class SEB: EbLLbWING lPAG~ ~~--+--+--~--+--+--~--+-~--~ C)J-4 c::C J-4 c.Q) ~~--~-+--+-~~~--+--1--~~ ~ r!....., __ .,_-+---+-~~-+--+--+---+---1 :: Months of the Season Years as above 105 NAME OF COMPANY OR DtSTRICT __Gr_at!_d _Va_ll~y _ WC!_te_r !}~.H:;_rs_ A!i_ ·n ._ LOCATION _ Gr~ncl J~nc !;iol]., ~ol_orasJ o _ wo. __ 4.2: _ I AVERAGE SEASONAL SUPPLY 19 51 TO 19 69 Total % of Water Apr, May. Jun. Ju~. Aug. Sept Oct. Total Effect· Full Supply .32 .91 .80 1. 2 .91 .49 . 16 Actual 1.0 ------IVe SupQLy_ Clos~ 0.9 4.60 3 85 100 I ---- . a a 0.7 / Actual Deliveries ~ '- .. --- / u Q$ Seasonal Supply i:-1 Acre Feet Per Acre C lcss BASIS OF SUPPLY DATA· Project delivery records BASIS FOR CLASSIFICATION· District acre Estimated average form requirement for full !upply 3.85 acre ft. per acre. Main canal losses 38 " Loterol losses 18 Y. Diversion requireme.nt full supply 9. 0 acre ft. per. acre. Considerably more than a full supply is diverted. Approx. 44% of the amount diverted ia delivered to the land. 106 GRAND VALLEY PROJECT FORM R·1 08 IRRIGATION COMPANlE' AND IRRIGATION DISmiCTS \\"ATER DISTRICT NO. REV. 11•0& ---"'4'--2 __ Garfield Gravity Division WATEH Sl'PPLY Delivered to fanns - acre-feet ACRES PER ACRE YEAR IRRIGATED April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. TOTAL DIV. DEL. 191)1 21 000 8 Rflfl 17 016 i16 054 20 331) 117 17':\ q 16fi 1 20'i 91 810 4 17 52 2 .. 11R? 19,fi1fi 11 h 832 20 749 117 126 9 77S 5 644 92 324 4 40 53 3 902 19 078 11 h 901 20 055 115 416 10 854 3 991 90a217 4 30 1:)4 R 11? 17 RQ7 111 Ro9 lB R41 119 7P.7 h c;oq, , 968 91 227 4 14 55 1,1fil) 1 R 773 116 812 21 971 117 191 12 719 4 914 93 747 4 46 --~ -- 1 9S6 6 fl'i1 1 q 'i60 11 R .066 18 922 118 16') 12 620 4 64S 98 829 4. 70 57 21 388 4R9 11 'i6 7 1.3~_82_8._ 20 710 111 s_n_ q 727 4 l15_ _JA_.~-- - -- ____ 3. 4.5 58 21 390 3 714 22 117_ lZ .471 21 182 119 416 8 Ql)fl 1 052 96 108 4 50 59 21 296 Ill, 8t!Q l9 956 117 .612 lL.l8_0_ ~12.6_ - __9 _..2_83_ --- _566_ _98,_6_33 " 4.63 f\0 h 12 0 JU.J ___ , ___ 9~ 1 or; 1 6 . f\42 ?1 1?fi , 17 .. R97 11 114 22 098 96 .448__ f--- -- 4 . .5.0 1961 21 375 7 777 19 197 118 323 21 000 119 085 4 032 1 000 90.414 4.V 62 20 125 9 141 18 824 116 .454 20 615 22 .654 11 817 1 271 100.976 5.02 63 20 0')6 110 211 20 Q66 116 308 21 814 118~25Ji 7 621 5 .426 101.120 --- 5. 05 64 20 1')6 4.46R 21 895 114 .9_90 22 649 118~.5.4.5- Lu~.52. __ _5_ 374 99 973 4_9.6 6') 20 7C)S 2 271 14 , f\QO 111 992 19 .481 120 1 07 Q 47Q ? 777 82 797 1 qq 1966 20 71)2 q Q44 21 039 118 821 23 191 1?1 174 10 129 2 'l'i? 108 852 5 20 f\7 20 81) 1 112 c;Qc; 1 R 1?0 7 590 20 790 120 'iQO 11 400 " ?40 QR 'i?'i 4 70 6R 20 194 11 P.RO 1Q 71'i llR 591) 23 20_5 114 7?0 ll..... 7?0 ? 710 qq 'in'i 4 RR lO .. Qla.R ?O,OQQ ?1 77Q Q77c;P. 119 ?0 71:\0 , 14 , h11 ?1 , R1? ') 11Q 1 01 --, 1 'iO 4 97 .. " _,..,__ A",:ll,. ?0 71:\0 ,; 7?R 1 P. Rf\6. 116 1 R4 ? 1 .OR'i 11 R Rc;O , 0 11F. 1 1", qc; 1QR 4 I)Q Ar> Ft' liAr 0 1? r. Ql 0 7R i 02 ;.. Q1 0 4Q ;.. ," 4 'iQ 1970 20.765 2.130 20.710 15,690 22,900 22,095 11,815 2,790 98,130 4. 72 71 20 819 'Is 1 6 E) 18 .. 725 117 .. 820 24 .. 790 23.645 9.810 3.040 112.995 5.42 72 20.866 18,070 19,720 17,060 25,385 23,530 10,505 1,085 115,355 5.53 73 20,886 3.365 19,.600 14,845 23,630 25,100 14,120 4,255 104,915 5.02 74 20,531 3.460 26,.280 21,410 33,980 24,010 14,330 4,820 128,290 6.24 1975 20,674 1!1530 20!1210 17,280 24,310 24.670 15.460 5.320 108,780 5.26 76 20,711 10.260 19,630 20,430 24.570 23.540 12.270 2.570 113.270 5.47 77 20,671 17,750 18,270 21,780 19.680 19 .. 970 9.300 3.730 111.820 5.40 78 20,700 3,920 20.640 22,480 24,550 23.020 12.800 6 .. 140 113 .. 550 5.50 79 21 .. 510 ~20 , 1 .Q70 11 Q 600 'J? RQO 1?1 r; "0 1h. c;QO 7 7?0 98 660 1£ liB AVE. Acre from Project Records • BASED ON NORMAL OUTSTANDING~AT 'ftntJtlll FOR ACRES 107 Grand Valley Water Users Association-cont. Grand Valley Project-U.S.B.R. General Statement The Grand Valley projects of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation comprise the lands served by the Highline or U.S. Government Canal of the Grand Valley Project and include the Grand Valley Project, the Palisade Irrigation District, the Mesa County Irrigation District, and the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District. However, these four subdivisions operate as separate organizations, have separate contracts with the U.S. Government and are discussed individually in this report revision. This section has to do with what is known as the Grand Valley Project-U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, as distinct from the other three subdivisions. The Highline Canal of the Grand Valley Project, which was completed about 1915, diverts from the north bank of the Colorado River about 7 miles east of Palisade in Section 13-Tl0S-R98W-6th P.M., and extends northwest for a distance of approximately 55 miles to a point about 5 miles north west of the town of Mack. The area originally intended to be served from the canal comprised the Garfield Gravity Division of 30,380 acres, a Lama Extension of 1,613 acres, and a pumping division of 10,250 acres, for a total of 42,243 acres. The Garfield Gravity Division of the project is the only unit that has been constructed, although the main canal was built with sufficient capacity to serve the other units if they are eventually constructed. In 1918, the U.S. Government entered into contracts with the Palisade and Mesa County Irrigation Districts which provide that the irrigation rights held by these districts shall be diverted and delivered to the distribution systems of the districts through the Highline Canal. These two irrigation districts pay an annual charge for this service. The revenue derived reverts to the benefit of the project in the payment of its annual con struction charges to the Government, under the terms of the contracts. In 1921 the Government entered into a contract with the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District for the rehabilitation and refinancing of the district. The contract provides that the water rights of this district shall be diverted and carried through the Highline Canal to a point about four miles below the diversion dam and there received by the district. This service is paid for by the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District under a joint maintenance agreement with the Grand Valley Project-U.S. Bureau of Recla mation whereby the district pays a pro-rata share of the maintenance of the dam and canal to the point of delivery. Other considerations of the contract obligate the district to carry power water in their power canal for the operation of the Projects hydro-electric plant. Construction costs of the rehabilitation work are paid direct to the Government under the terms of the contract. The Garfield Gravity Division of the Grand Valley Project-U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which is usually referred to as the Grand Valley Project, comprises an area of 30,380 acres of which 23,340 acres are currently classed as productive land. The lands lie westerly from Grand Junction and embrace the area bebween the Highline and Grand Valley Canals. In cluded is a table showing the acreage and average yield of the principal field crops and orchard crops over the period 1959-69. Most of the fruit production is under the Orchard Mesa, Palisade and Mesa County Irrigation Districts rather than the Grand Valley Project. 108 -2- Project Debt Obligation There have been a number of revLs1ons and contractual amendments involv ing the obligation of the district. The general contract of 1928 estab lished the obligation of the then 23,230 acres of productive land under the Garfield Gravity Division at $1,938,570, with the provision that should additional acreage be developed the obligation would be increased in some proportion. A new contract signed January 27, 1945 established the total construction cost at $2,639,564, but declared $1,139,373 as being assigned to unproduc tive land on which payment should be deferred leaving an unpaid balance of $1,368,757. The unproductive land was distributed as follows: 7,150 acres in Garfield Gravity Division with obligation of $ 562,722 1,613 acres in Lorna Extension with obligation of 50,250 10,250 acres in Garfield Pumping Ext. with obligation of 526,401 Total deferred payment $1,139,373 Repayment of this $1,368,757 obligation was established as follows: For the period 1945-59 $32,332 annually 1960-70 67,539 annually 1971-74 70,420 annually or until debt is retired. In the late 1940's or early 1950 a collapse of tunnel No. 3 occurred, and the project was in need of extensive rehabilitation. As a result an amendment contract was signed on March 3, 1950 to permit the expenditure of $1,500,000 for repair and betterment of the project. The final amount spent on this work was $1,658,000 on which repayment was scheduled as follows: 1954-58 - $ 9,000 annually 1959-73 - 1,000 annually 1974-2015 - 33,800 annually or until the total amount is repaid The result of these ~o contracts is that repayment of the obligation under the 1945 contract will be completed about 1974 at which time the repayment schedule will begin on the obligation under the 1950 contract. The present payments for construction are $73,750 annually payable in ~o instalments each year. A portion of the repayment costs are paid from revenue received from sale of power produced by a small hydro-electric plant constructed by the U.S. Government at a cost of some $215,000, and leased to the Public Service Company of Colorado under a contract dated June 19, 1931. Revenue from this source has been around $40,000 annually, all of which is applied as credit on the district obligation. It appears the present assessment for construction repayment of $1.40 per acre should be ample to meet the future obligation of the district unless the need for extensive rehabilitation of the diversion dam or other features should arise. lU~ -3- Water Supply Court decree of July 22, 1912 granted Priority No. 10 to the Grand Valley Project without fixing the amount pending ultimate development of land and application of water to beneficial use. The general court decree of July 25, 1941 established the amount under this priority at 730 cfs with the same appropriation date-February 27, 1908-and renumbered the priority as Number 198 in the district (Number 10 on the Colorado River). This same decree granted priority 41 for 400 cfs to be used for commercial power during the irrigation season and 800 cfs in the non-irrigation season, also bearing the date of February 27, 1908. The 1941 decree also granted Domestic Priority 40 in the amount of 220 cfs with the same priority date February 27, 1908. This right was in tended to be used for domestic purposes throughout the year. The district has not delivered this domestic priority water since the Ute Water Con servancy District was established as a rural pipe line to supply rural areas with domestic water. Project records over the past 20 years or so indicate an average diver sion of more than 9 acre-feet per acre. Approximately 26% of this amount is wasted back to the river and another 30% is lost through canal seepage, evaporation, etc., leaving some 44% for delivery to the land. This pro ject normally has a fully ample supply. GRAND VALLEY PROJECT-Summary Acreage and Average Yield of Principal Crops Alfalfa (T) Irr. Pasture (AUM) Sugar Beets (T) Ensilage (T) Corn (bu) Barley (bu) Crop Value Year acres yield acres yield acres yield acres yield acres yield acres Yield per Irr. Ac. 1959 9,664 3.5 3,316 5.5 2,453 23.7 1,148 13.2 6,015 81 680 38 $165.33 60 10,447 3.6 3,663 4.9 2,679 18.7 1,040 11.9 5,320 85 453 35 109.68 61 10,228 3.6 4,131 4.9 2,661 22.1 1,090 14.7 4,927 89 445 52 189.66 62 10,065 3.7 3,686 5.0 3,523 21.6 1,071 13.7 4,818 90 457 48 225.74 63 9,890 3.8 3,755 5.8 3,676 17.0 976 15.0 4,946 95 557 48 181.06 64 9,071 3.7 3,778 5.6 3,234 19.3 1,371 14.8 4,468 73 549 43 141.68 1965 9,793 3.8 3,595 5.8 2,541 21.3 2,086 15.7 4,356 76 631 61 180.75 66 9,473 3.9 4,118 5.8 2,636 20.1 1,973 16.2 4,166 92 877 55 125.97 67 9,308 3.8 4,891 4.7 2,449 25.1 1,741 19.4 4,863 98 1,017 72 127.32 68 8,634 3.7 5,226 4.6 2,781 18.6 2,174 16.3 3,284 79 1, 051 57 232.49 69* 6,049 4.7 2,494 7.2 3,052 27.9 1,551 17.7 3,784 102.4 52 35.3 269.26 1970 *Garfield Gravity Division only I- I c: GRAND VALLEY PROJECT Acreage, Average Yield and Value of Orchard Crops Peaches-cwt Apples-cwt Cherries-cwt Pears-cwt Year acres yield value/ac acres yield value/ac acres yield value/ac acres yield value/ac 1959 4,983 118.7 $539.14 229 65.8 $333.63 119 54.6 $452.84 154 155.2 $949.92 60 4,350 44.8 212.86 250 7.0 21.40 115 23.0 173.87 126 47.2 228.32 61 4,943 116.5 640.63 317 138.7 652.54 127 82 .. 0 739.08 156 176.0 1020 .. 95 62 4,835 106.1 804.22 330 141.0 890.03 172 41.4 457.85 168 156.6 1329.28 63 3,418 55.5 446.93 568 108.2 759.07 138 22.4 323.74 365 171.0 1453 .. 59 64 2,230 82.4 309.23 382 115.4 605 .. 87 167 43.3 216.53 123 66.9 220.83 1965 4,125 110.4 497.00 830 167.0 835.04 169 66.5 332.56 601 100.1 600.56 66 3,573 33.9 211.54 1,318 42.3 211.50 168 8.1 102.93 576 84.1 421.47 67 2,453 21.2 211.83 1,444 39.7 277.59 148 13.2 157.95 479 37.0 259.18 68 4,253 84.9 552.07 1,292 120.7 1086.30 528 31.9 448.68 890 85.8 772.26 69 2,010 105.0 525.01 408 116.1 638.31 179 68.9 689.44 145 178.7 982.83 1970 112 Colorado River - Main Stream Miscellaneous Ditches and Decrees District Approp. Amount Decree Acres Supply Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Granted Class Remarks Orchard Mesa Power Canal 181(3) 3-6-1889 110.70 7-22-1912 Irr. & Pow. 188(6) 8-2-1898 139.30 7-22-1912 Irr. & Pow. Priority 3 (renumbered 181) and Priority 6 (renumbered 186) were granted in the court decree of 7-22-1912 as a private enterprise, each decree with 10 cfs for irrigation and the balance for power to lift the irri gation water some 80 feet to the lands of the claimants. This right is not to be confused with the power canal of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District. Diversion was by means of a turbine driving a pump located on the left or south side of the Colorado River on SE~ Section 20-TlS-RlE-Ute Meridian. About 200 acres were irrigated for a few years. Upon completion of the works of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District, this plant was abandoned and the rights have not been used since. The land is served by the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District, but the rights have not been transferred or formally abandoned. The ownership of these decrees, if claimed by anyone, is uncertain. The rights should be considered as abandoned for appraisal purposes, unless beneficial use can be reestablished and recognized by the proper officials. Mann Pumping System 194(9) 9-10-1903 1.00 7-22-1918 60 I See Remarks This right was granted to divert from the east or left bank of the Colorado River on the NW\ Section 2~TllS-R98W-6th P.M., by means of a steam pump. The ditch was reportedly destroyed during construction of the power canal of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District. In exchange for a right-of-way across the property, the district permitted the owner of the Mann Pumping right to install his pump in the power canal and pump the amount of water decreed. This arrangement has apparently been followed for many years without the owner subscribing his land to the district, or the water right being transferred to the power canal. The project people reportedly went to court a few years ago to force some decision regarding the right. The court granted the present owner permission to continue pumping from the power canal of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation Dis trict during his lifetime without a license under the project. The owner is reported to be elderly now, and it would appear that some change in the status of the decree will eventually take place. A small electric-powered pump is reported to be in use, but the location, condition of the plant, or the land covered were not inspected. The present status of the water right should be investigated through the project office if the decree is offered as security in connection with an application for loan. January 1970 113 Colorado River -Main Stream (cont 1 d) Miscellaneous Ditches and Decrees District Approp. Amount Decree Acres Supply Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Granted Class Remarks Cameo Irrigation Ditch and Pumping Plant 199{11) 3-1-1908 0.78 7-22-1912 Not in use Former reports show this water right was granted to divert from the right hand side of the Colorado River by means of a pumping plant located in the NEt Section 27-TlOS-R98W. The report made in 1936 shows no use of the ditch and the present water commissioner indicated the right has never been used. The system should be considered as abandoned for appraisal purposes. DeBeque and Rhone Ditch 200(12) 7-1-1910 not fixed 7-22-1912 Not in use This right was granted with the amount not stated as the ditch had not been built at the time of the adjudication. The ditch has apparently never been constructed so would have no value for appraisal purposes. Rose Point Power Canal 201(13) 7-2-1910 110.00 7-22-1912 Irr. Power 201(13) 7-2-1910 3.25 7-22-1912 Irr. Court decree granted Priority 13 (renumbered 201) for 3.25 cfs to be used for irrigation and 110.00 cfs for power to raise the 3.25 cfs from the river to the land. A small plant was located on the left-hand side of the Colorado River in the east part of Section 21-T1S-R1E-Ute Meridian. This plant was used a few years until the completion of the works of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District. The land is now served by the district. The water right is reported to be property of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District, but there has been no change in point of diversion since the decree is junior to the original Orchard Mesa decrees. The right would have no independent value for appraisal purposes. January 1970 ._,- 114 COLORADO RIVER - Main Stream - Cont. Hurlburt Ditch District Approp. Amount Decree Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Classification 374 5-15-1914 1.56 7-25-1941 (See Remarks) This ditch was granted as a private ditch with Cora C. Hurlburt as claimant. The headgate is supposed to be located at a point on the north bank of the Colorado River near the northeast boundary of land belonging to the claimant described as Lots 2, 3, 8, 9, 13 and 14 of Section 9 and Lots 5 and 14 of Section 10-TlN-R3W-Ute Meridian, according to a plat of resurvey filed 1-25-1921 in Mesa County. The source of the water supply for the ditch can be either by pumping or by gravity from the river. The location of the diversion is just south of the town of Lomat and would be near the point where the Kiefer Extension of the Grand Valley Irrigation Company returns to the river. No diversion records are kept for this water right, and the status of the ditch was not ascertained. The Water Commissioner indicated the ditch could be in use, but he has never been required to administer the right. The status of the ditch should be verified if the water right is offered in connection with an application for loan. If properly usedt the right could be a class I supply for about 85 acres based on 0.72 cfs for 40 acres. Kinney Ditch District Approp. Amount Decree Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Classification 375 5-16-1914 2.73 7-25-1941 (See Remarks) This ditch was granted as a private ditch with E.V. Farris as claimant. The headgate is given as the left bank of the Colorado River at a point from whence the Southeast corner of Section 35-TlN-R2W Ute Meridian bears S 32 degrees 56' E 4608 feet. The existance of the ditch was not determined as no records of diversions are available. The Water Commissioner indicated the ditch could be in use, but he has never been called upon to administer the right. The location is near the lower end of the area served by the Redlands Water and Power Company which diverts from the Gunnison River, and drainage could be a problem on land adjacent to the Colorado River. 6-1975 115 Kinney Ditch - Cont. The status of the ditch should be verified if the priority is offered in connection with an application for loan. The priority could provide a Class II supply for about 150 acres based on 0.72 cfs for 40 acres if found to be in proper condition. L.H. Hurt Pump District Approp. Amount Decree Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Classification 790 3-17-1947 2.00 7-21-1959 (See Remarks) 790C 3-17-1947 2.00 7-21-1959 Conditional This right was granted as a private pump diverting from the north or right bank of the Colorado River in the Southeast quarter of Section 7-TlS-R2E Ute Meridian with L.H. Hurt as claimant. The decree states the pump has suffici·ent capacity to lift 5. 0 cfs of water an average height of 10 feet into a ditch 100 yards long. The absolute portion of the decree was granted to irrigate about 25 acres of sandy land with gravel subsoil. The conditional part of the water right was granted for an additional 25 acres when this acreage was developed and water put to use. The land irrigated under the set-up is located on what is an island in the river for part of the year. The condition of the set-up was not determined as there is no record of use. The location is in the well developed area between Clifton and Palisade. The status of the water right and the condition of the equipment should be investigated if the right is offered in connection with an application for loan. The absolute portion of the priority could probably be a Class II supply for the 25 acres granted in the decree. McCall Pumping Plant District Approp. Amount Decree Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Classification 809 7-26-1948 0 .. 97 7-21-1959 (See Remarks) This right was granted as a private pump supply diverting from the left bank of the Colorado River whence the S~ corner of Section 22-TlS-RlE Ute Meridian bears South 2376 feet. The pipeline is reported to be 6 inches in diameter and 400 feet long with capacity of 1.0 cfs. The right was granted for the irrigation of 38 acres of land on the basis of 1.0 cfs for 40 acres. 6-1975 116 There is no record of use under this system. The location is within the area served by the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District and could be included under this system. The current status of the water right and condition of the equipment should be determined if the priority is offered in con nection with an application for loan. The right could provide a Class II supply for the 38 acres granted if the system is found to be in good order. Arbogast Pump Plant No. 1 District Approp. Amount Decree Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Classification 832 7-1-1950 4.00 7-21-1959 (See Remarks) Arbogast Pump Plant No. 2 833 7-1-1950 2.25 7-21-1959 (See Remarks) 833C 7-1-1950 0.75 7-21-1959 Conditional Arbogast Pump Plant No. 3 834 7-1-1950 3.00 7-21-1959 (See Remarks) These three water rights were granted as private rights with Lloyd M. Arbogast and Fred J. Arbogast as claimants. The system is made up of three electrically driven pumps with discharge diameter of 12 inches lift of 12 feet and capacity of 3 to 4 cfs. The three pumps were granted with equal priority for the irri gation of up to 250 acres out of up to 500 acres of irrigable land owned by the claimants. The three pumps discharge into a common ditch about 1.25 miles long from which irrigation begins immediately. The location is on the south or left bank of the Colorado River in the N~ Sec. 14-TlN-R3W Ute Meridian which is below the town of Fruita. This system is reported to be in use, but the extent of use is not known as no records are kept by the Water Commissioner. The status of the water rights and the condition of the equipment should be investigated if the priorities are offered in connection with an application for loan. The rights would probably provide a Class II supply for the 250 acres claimed if all the units are found to be in satisfactory condition. Goffredi-Pipe Line-Pump Station District Approp. Amount Decree Prio. No. Date (cfs) Date Classification 865 7-1-1951 0.29 7-21-1959 (See Remarks) 865C 7-1-1951 0.47 7-21-1959 Conditional 6-1975 117 Goffredi Pipe Line Pump Station - Cont. This right was granted with John and Alfred Goffredi as claimants to divert from the left bank of the Colorado River at a point whence the NE corner of Sec. 2-TllS-R68W bears N 73 degrees 46' E 5815 feet. Diversion is by means of a 15 horsepower electric motor which drives a 2-inch centrifugal pump connected to a 4 inch steel pipeline 1400 feet long with a capacity of about 1.0 cfs. The right was granted for use on 20 acres of additional land for which the capacity of the pump was designed. The decree provides that when the diversion is being used in conjunction with the diversion from Rapid Creek, the combined diversion for the irrigation of said 6 acres of orchard shall not exceed 0.16 cfs. The status of this pump station was not determined as no record is made of diversions. It was reported that the water right might be pumped from the Orchard Mesa Power Canal, but. this was not verified. The right should provide a Class II supply for the 10 acres irrigated with the absolute portion of the right, and a Class II supply for the additional 20 acres if the conditional portion has been made absolute. 6-1975 118 GRAND JUNCTION DRAINAGE DISTRICT Old reports on this area state that an election was held on August 24, 1915 to vote on the formation of the Grand Valley Drainage District. The results were favorable, and on September 6, 1915 the County Commissioners declared the district organized. The organization was locally called a preliminary district. On December 11, 1915, the preliminary district voted the approval of a contract with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation whereby the latter was to make a survey and plans for drainage of the Grand Valley Drainage District. The estimated cost of the survey and plans was $30,000 and later increased to $35,000. These surveys and plans were very detailed and thousands of borings were made to determine the water table, character of soil, seeped conditions, etc. No agreement could be reached by the district and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation as to how to raise the money for the drains. Nothing was done until 1923 when the State Legislature passed a bill especially providing for the organization of the Grand Junction Drainage District which was to be the successor of the Grand Valley Drainage District. Bonds were issued by the Grand Junction Drainage District to the amount of $35,000, all of which were paid. No special assessments were to be made by the Grand Junction Drainage District, but levies on the entire assessed valuation of property within the district were to be made. Boundaries of the new district were to be essentially the same as the former district. They embrace all the land between the Colorado River and the Grand Valley Project-U.S.B.R., the upper end being the Stub Ditch to its lower end in Section 31-TlN-RlE-Ute Meridian, then dropping down to the Grand Valley Irrigation Company ditch and following same via the Kiefer Extension to the Colorado River. The Colorado River from the in take of the Stub Ditch to the lower end of the Grand Valley ditch is the lower or southern boundary of the district. Included in the district are the towns of Grand Junction, Fruita, and Palisade and smaller towns of Clifton and Lama. The estimate for construction of necessary drains was $1,700,000 for some 85 miles of open ditch and tile drains. District officials, realizing the sale of bonds in this amount would require $70,000 per year in inter est alone, decided to make their levies on the assessed valuation of this amount or less, and do the work themselves as money was available. The district purchased equipment starting with two ditching machines. This practice has apparently been followed over the years with drains being constructed or deepened as needed. The mill levy and assessed valuation of the district for the years 1967-69 are as follows: Year Valuation Mill Levy Tax Levy 1967 $62,441,350 2.62 $163,595 1968 65,026,610 2.87 186,626 1969 66,822,523 2.69 179,752 The District ,keeps its expenditures within the limits of its collectible tax levy and is in sound financial condition. It has no bonded indebted ness. The tax levy against all property is included in the general tax and no special consideration is required. ~ .., ··- r - • r ' I ;- IQ,/7 t • . ., ,·..... , I•". t I ,, 7 February 1970 119 PALISADE DRAINAGE DISTRICT The Palisade Drainage District includes a small area lying at the extreme eastern edge of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District. It is the same area that was under the East Palisade Irrigation District, and has been a part o·f the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District since about 1935. This is an old established, well developed and improved orchard area, known as the Vineland area that has long been recognized for its peach production. Drainage difficulties were encountered in the area many years ago, and a system of tile drains was installed by the Palisade Drainage District. The district has no indebtedness, but continues to function for the maintenance of its drainage system. Assessments are levied directly against the land and collected by the County Treasurer with the real estate taxes. The county abstract of assessments shows 529 acres as being assessed in the district and the assessment has been $2.00 per acre at least since 1967. Lands within the Palisade Drainage District are subject to the same loan recommendations and assessments as the other land in the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District, with the addition of $2.00 per acre for drainage maintenance. January 1970