**TESTIMONY**

**before**

**SUBCOMMITTEE - WATER and POWER**

**SENATE COMMITTEE**

**ENERGY and NATURAL RESOURCES**

**JACKSON GULCH REHABILITATION BILL S.1477**

**by**

**GARY KENNEDY, SUPERINTENDENT**

**MANCOS WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT**

**JULY 26, 2007**

**COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS:**

I am before you representing the board of directors and residents of the
Mancos Water Conservancy District. I am Gary Kennedy, Superintendent of
the District for the last 18 years. I would like to thank you for
holding this hearing in order that I can provide information on Jackson
Gulch Rehabilitation Act of 2007 (S.1477).

**HISTORY**

First I would like to provide a brief history of the project. The
ranchers living in the Mancos valley during the dust bowl of the 1930's
also experienced a devastating drought. This brought about discussion
and a study---the end result of this was the construction of Jackson
Gulch Reservoir (an off-river dam) providing storage of 10,000 acre feet
of water storage. 2.6 miles of feeder canal (Inlet Canal) snakes along
the steep West Mancos River Canyon, across a narrow mesa and dumps water
from the West Mancos River into Jackson Gulch. Storage water is returned
back to the river via 2.2 miles of return flow canal (Outlet Canal).

The Mancos Project was authorized in 1940; construction began in 1941.
The CCC's began construction. During WWII, their camp became the home of
many conscientious objectors. In 1947, the Venel Company was awarded the
contract for the dam which was completed in 1954.

Construction was continually plagued by interruptions caused by earth
slides, rock falls, and adverse weather. Construction roads along the
Inlet Canal were constantly being reinforced and rebuilt. In 1958 the
Bureau of Reclamation elected to discontinue rebuilding the roads.
Natural erosion over the years has narrowed many places to barely
walking trail width.

Immense boulders have rolled right through portions of the canal.
Mudslides have filled the canal requiring lengthy shut-downs for
repairs. This could occur at anytime along the canal today. Fortunately
with Reclamation's assistance, the majority of the concrete flumes are
protected from small rock fall and mudslides by concrete lids. However,
the earthen sections are still vulnerable to slides that which fill
sections and/or take the canal into the canyon with them. We have
experienced the loss of 700 feet of canal in the last 10 years. Boulders
the size of cars hitting canal walls has created the need for emergency
repairs.

![](media/image1.png){width="5.054861111111111in"
height="3.7930555555555556in"}

**O&M (Operations and Maintenance)**

The District assumed operations and maintenance of the project in 1963
and has continued to the satisfaction of the Bureau of Reclamation to
date.

In the last 20 years, we have financed and overseen major upgrades to
the project such as:

Construction of a permanent diversion dam on the West Mancos River.

Installation of a Hydroelectric Power Plant (increased revenue).

Installation of automated Measuring Devices and Structures
(conservation).

Purchase of Canal Easement.

Safety Measures (fences, protective covers on the canal, 200 feet of
pipe for safety).

New Equipment for O&M.

500 feet of pipe for Canal Repair.

400 feet of Penstock Pipe Upgrade.

New bridges at canal crossings.

The total amount of money spent during these years for these upgrades is
over \$850,000.

**IMPORTANCE of the MANCOS PROJECT and JACKSON GULCH RESERVOIR**

Many valley residents depend on the agricultural land for their
livelihood. The town of Mancos and the Mancos Rural Water Company
utilize the water stored in the reservoir to supply domestic water to
residents. The water provided to over 550,000 annual visitors (742,080
in 1992) to Mesa Verde National Park is supplied by the reservoir.

In 1998, we experienced loss of a section of canal due to a landslide.
The emergency repair was exceedingly expensive. In 2002, drought
conditions resulted in sacrifice of irrigation water by agricultural
producers in order that domestic water could be provided with drastic
conservation measures. It is hard to imagine what would have happened
had the reservoir not been in place to supply the domestic water. Our
agricultural producers are just now recovering from that summer.

It is plainly evident that loss of the reservoir is unacceptable. It is
also evident that the District does not and cannot sustain or generate
the revenue required to continue emergency management.

Since the loss of the reservoir is not an option and emergency
management is cost prohibitive, two options remain\--either to rebuild
the structures or to rehabilitate the structures. The Board requested a
feasibility study from the Bureau of Reclamation for the cost to replace
the structures and/or to rehabilitate the structures. The study was
completed in 2000. Cost to rebuild was so excessive that rehabilitation
was chosen. Projected cost at that time was 5.6 million. A formal
engineer study came back with a cost of 6.2 million for total
rehabilitation.

**CONSEQUENCES OF CANAL FAILURE**

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="3.34375in" height="2.532638888888889in"}
The canals were built in 1947 and 1948. The canals had a flow capacity
of 258 c.f.s. They are concrete box flumes in some sections and earthen
in others. Natural occurrences and emergency repairs have forced a
reduction in our flow capacity. Current capacity is 160 c.f.s.

The earthen canal sections have been plagued with land/mud slides since
the start of construction. As stated previously, we've lost 700 feet of
earthen canal in the last 10 years. Repairs to canal sections cost well
over \$170,000 requiring loans from the State of Colorado. The failure
of the canal area happened after extremely dry summers when the water in
the reservoir was lower than normal. In fact, it had been drawn down to
historic levels -- 18% - equal to 2 years of domestic water supplies.

The concrete box flume was designed and constructed before the use of
rubber water stops for construction joints. Over 50% of the construction
joints have experienced serious deterioration causing reduced structural
integrity. The seepage from deteriorating concrete walls not only
reduces the structural integrity, it also contributes to slope
instability and failure.

One other hazard to the concrete flumes is rock fall. There is 1,400
feet of the flume that is exposed to high-moderate rock falls. The right
rock in the wrong place would destroy a section of the canal causing a
large financial hardship due to the manner in which the repair would
have to be made (helicopter in most cases). It would also most likely
happen during inflow to the reservoir restricting water to the reservoir
for an extended amount of time. Depending on the seasonal precipitation,
it could take us more than one season to recover and would possibly
cause great strain on water availability for domestic and agriculture.

Access is a huge problem to approximately 1,000 feet of concrete flume.
The construction road was not rebuilt after it failed in 1958.
Rebuilding the road is much more financially responsible than making
repairs by helicopter.

![](media/image3.jpeg){width="3.8666666666666667in"
height="2.886111111111111in"}

The operation facilities were constructed in 1941-42 as temporary
facilities. Partly due to the era and partly due to their temporary
status, they were constructed using unconventional building methods.
Therefore, these buildings do not conform to uniform building codes and
do not comply with federal regulations. The District's Superintendent is
required to live on-site by contract with Bureau of Reclamation.
Following 9/11 this is even more important for the safety and security
of the project itself.

**PREVIOUS LEGISLATION**

Most discussion on water projects focus on dams. There are financial
programs (grants, etc) for dam safety, water storage, and conservation.
However, for the few dams that rely on canals to supply the water for
storage, there are no programs to help fund major repairs.

In 1983, P.L. 98-50, 97 Stat. 251 was passed appropriating 3 million
dollars for improvement of siphons, concrete liners, improved irrigation
efficiency, to conserve water and reduce O&M costs. The cost of this
rehabilitation was non-reimbursable and the rehabilitated and new
features were turned over to the operating entity for future O&M.

**FUNDING**

The District began to search for assistance for funding the
rehabilitation:

-   We studied our ability to increase our income (water rates and
    taxes). It was immediately evident that the small population of the
    Mancos Valley could not provide total funding but may be encouraged
    to accept an increase in their mill levy taxes to cover a small
    percentage of the overall cost. In 1995 we asked the members of our
    District to approve a mill levy increase of 5 mills to cover what we
    felt was a reasonable share of the cost of rehabilitation our
    residents could provide. The increase would bring our total mill
    levy to 6.5 mills. The measure passed by a very comfortable margin
    providing us with not only the increased funds but the absolute
    knowledge our residents understand the utmost importance of their
    water supply and supported our efforts.

-   Water rates have been gradually increased in past years to cover the
    cost of emergency repairs and will continue to be gradually
    increased.

-   The Board requested assistance from the Bureau of Reclamation with
    no success.

-   We researched and applied for grants. Our research has revealed that
    there are no grants, state or federal, large enough to cover the
    cost. We were successful in securing a small grant to study the
    effects of lining material in the canal. This will be finalized this
    year. We were also successful in securing an EPA/Stag grant but have
    been unable to collect these funds (\$250,000).

-   We went to the State of Colorado. The State (CWCB) approved a line
    of credit for engineering, cost share and interim emergency repairs.

-   We decided to apply to Washington D.C. for appropriations. We have
    been here [four]{.underline} years in a row with our request for
    partial funding to be awarded annually until complete (6 years).
    Each year reveals an increase in the cost due to rapidly increasing
    construction expenses. And each year brings us closer to a
    catastrophic canal failure.

Before the study for rehabilitation, the District was aware of the need
for increased revenue. After a lengthy process, a hydroelectric power
plant was installed. The power plant is providing up to 250 KWH of hydro
power or 912,000 KWH annually -- enough electric power for 60 homes
saving 5,000 barrels of oil annually. The most revenue increase brought
in by the hydro plant is \$22,000/annually.

**CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE TO SECURE FUNDING**

The options for the District should we fail to secure the funding
necessary to rehabilitate the project are dismal. We cannot force funds
from a source (valley residents) with no funds available. Current funds
allow us to do some of the lesser rehabilitation but do not and cannot
begin to cover the cost of the overall project. Emergency repairs will
become more and more frequent causing the District to incur more and
more debt. There will come a point when we will be unable to secure
funding to cover the cost of emergency repairs. It is projected that
maintenance issues will be forced to be delayed in order to cover
emergency repairs.

At that point it is projected that Bureau of Reclamation will begin to
express concern and dissatisfaction with the O&M until the District will
have no choice but to turn the project back over to Reclamation. When
this possibility was brought to discussion before the board and
Reclamation, the question was what would happen if this were to occur?
The answer given to the board was that Reclamation is no longer in a
financial position to operate and maintain this project; therefore in
all likelihood the project would be locked up and/or shut down.

If this were to be an eventuality, recreation on the reservoir would
cease. Current estimates of visitation to the reservoir are 80,000
people annually. Domestic water organizations would be forced to
consider their own storage facilities to maintain some water delivery.
Mesa Verde National Park would have to consider a storage facility or
the possibility of having to haul water from other delivery points.
Irrigated agriculture would cease to exist -- limited dry land
agriculture may be able to be maintained. If the drought continues, the
river would dry up not far below the town limits in the months of July
and August possibly through October. There is no way to predict the
effect on wildlife, particularly waterfowl. We cannot begin to speculate
on the effects to the people themselves.

Therefore, we are here before you now asking for assistance in passage
of this Bill. Passage will insure continued use of a project considered
extremely vital in the 1940's and no less vital -- if not more so --
today. Plus, this Bill not only affects our local area, it will continue
to fulfill that part of the Upper Colorado Compact which was established
in 1922. It will protect not only the environmental issues connected
with the canal system but agriculture, recreation, cultural, historical
and futuristic uses. We ask you to observe the vision of our forefathers
for the West and keep looking to the future and protect these resources
so vital to those who will follow us.

Thank you for this time in order that I could impress upon you the
importance of the rehabilitation of the Jackson Gulch Rehabilitation
Project Bill S.1477.