Planning Program
 Dam and Reservoir Planning
 Groundwater Grant Projects
 Instream Flow Filings
 Current Planning Projects
 River Basin Planning
 Weather Modification Study
 Probable Maximum Precipitation
 Water Research Projects

Construction Program
 Current Construction Projects
 Small Water Projects

Agency Publications
 Project Reports
 Water/Climate Web Atlas
 Irrigation & Water System Surveys
 Legislative Reports
 Water Mgmnt & Conservation Dir
 History of Wyoming Water Law

WWDC Home Page

Water Plan Home Page

WRDS Home Page

1999 LEGISLATIVE REPORT
Active Projects

PROJECT INFORMATION:
In 1984, the States of Wyoming, Utah and Idaho joined forces to evaluate the potential of a project on the Smiths Fork of the Bear River which would serve to provide benefits to all three states. Since that time, the project has evolved to a 50,000 acre-foot reservoir which would cost approximately $35,000,000. The project would provide water supply, hydropower, water quality, flood control and recreation benefits. In 1986, the State of Utah prepared an economic feasibility report which concluded that the project was economically feasible if all three states participated in the costs and the benefits.

Relative to Wyoming, the project could provide flood control, recreation, hydropower, and supplemental irrigation water supply benefits. Presently, the tri-state Smiths Fork project appears to be the most economical means to develop the Cokeville and Cokeville Development Association's storage allocation of 14,520 acre-feet. Therefore, the WWDC has included the Smiths Fork among its candidates for state projects to be pursued as financial resources are available. However, a primary consideration will be the ability of the states of Utah and Idaho to obtain their share of required project funding.

In 1988, the U.S. Corps of Engineers (COE) prepared a development plan for the entire Bear River. The report was completed in 1989. Several options were identified. The report verified that a dam on the Smiths Fork would provide considerable flood control, storage and water quality benefits. However, the economic assessment concluded that the project had an unfavorable benefit-cost ratio and, therefore, would not be eligible for federal funding under existing criteria. The project is presently on hold status in the New Development Program. There is local and increasing downstream interest in the project.

RECOMMENDED LEGISLATIVE ACTION:
The WWDC recommends that the project be retained at Level II-Hold status.