The Hardin tribune-herald. [volume] (Hardin, Mont.) 1925-1973, 1945-11-01

him on the initial outlay only.
However on the comparative
services to be rendered by stor-
age of the flood waters of the
two projects, we have a case
where one foot of storage in
the Yellowtail Project is worth
about ten feet of stored water
in the Boysen. For by storing
flood water at the YelloWtail
dam and allowing it to feed
out at 1900 second feet through
out the year, there would re-
suit a saving from flood and
sediment alone along the Big
Horn, the Yellowstone, Missouri
and Mississippi rivers, OF from
two to four millions of dollars
annually. The Boysen could on
ly contribute from three to
four tenths of this amount or
only in proportion to its flow.
This is only one instance out
of three or four that could be
cited. The same holds true with
respect to the power to be de-
veloped, also in the aid of ma
vigation on the Missouri and
the upper Mississippi Rivers
and also in its related effect
on the Ft. Peck project.
It seems that in citing COM
, parative costs of stored water,
the Commissioner is trying to
establish a rule for measuring
this value. His rule simply won't
work. For instance, the greatest
vaue from stored water is OBJ
tanned when the amount of
water is so stored is sufficient
to equaliZe the normal flow of
the River throughout the year.
An amount of water stored a.
bove this amount may often be
superfluous.
1t does not follow that be-
cause Boysen has a greater
storage at less cost that it is
the best storage. Just the re-
verse may be true as in the case
of the Big Horn Yellowtail pro-
ject. The storage there is Just
sufficient to store all the flood
waters of the year to he let out
to equalize the flow throughout
the year thus bringing about
the greatest possible values to
! all its manifold features and
which in turn enhances the
value of its flood storage from
20 to 40 times that at Boysen.
His reason No. S. Ordinarily
this would be true. In this case
however the Yellowtail project
with its foundations already
very much tested and surveys
mapped and filed, should give
it a running start over the
Boysen Project.
Reason No. 6. He states that
!; water stored in Boysen will take
: care of Montana as well as
Wyoming until the Yellowtail
Is built and that no infringe
mentS in Montana water rights
Will result. This will hold true
as long as there is enough water
to care for both, but Should
there arise a shortage. the new
project located in Wyoming. To-
Gated near the Boysen dam
and made possible by it, would
get the water. When the prior
right project located far awav
In Montana might be without
water. Probably the Commiss-
Toner assumes that in such e.
vent the water user could
whistle for his water, as every
enc versed in the use of water
knows.
In summing up the reasons
assigned now by the Commiss-
loner for delaying the Yellow
tail Project he evidently over-
looked its ten times greater DO
teltlalities of which if he in
formed, and he should be, he
mas never voiced a word.
Does he anywhere refer to
the two or four millions of dol
lars of annual savings which
would result from controlling
the flood and sediment along
the Big Horn, Yellowstone, Mis-