Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.,. -"" ..' h~';""~'.o:',_ .~'::":n{;..~" '7f:~ ...:,-.:;:~~, ::;"....::;':~t:.-Q--::. ;'--......l. ;:"'~'';.Il..'i~~{~~i,~~;:;'.i~. 'Jft'p.~v:.~1.~.if;,?{ <br /> <br />.'~j . c. , ~ <br /> <br /> <br />f' <br />'It:~ <br />~,', <br />t <br />~T <br />~) <br />~-:', <br />~:~ <br />" <br />\:;,-, <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />-. ... - .~. . <br /> <br />- .~ ';.,:~!""'" <br />.., <br /> <br />,.,~ . , >""~ ',-'- ~ .'~ ,-; ":. . <br /> <br />. , <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />the formula, only annual values at Lees Ferry have been used. It is felt tbat <br /> <br />tbese data may be somewhat more accurate than the Virgin Flows mentioned above. <br /> <br />the formula along with the two hydrology data sets were computerized in order <br /> <br />to allow any combiuation of variables and values and tbeir effects on allowable <br /> <br />depletions to be examined. To validate the use of the formula in the present <br /> <br />study, succe.sful attempts to verify the previous (1965) studies were made. <br /> <br />These are di.cussed in tbe next section. After verification was obtained, runs <br /> <br />using the new period of record were made to determine values of allowable deple- <br /> <br /> <br />tions values by use of the formula, the values were further verified by rans <br /> <br />u.ing tbe Colorado River Shaulation System (CRSS) computer model. <br /> <br />Representative determination runs for the formula method and the model method <br /> <br />are presented in Tables 4 and 5 respectively. <br /> <br />B. <br /> <br />Discussion ~ Results <br /> <br />AD analysis of a shailar .tudy of Upper Basin depletion level by Tipton and <br /> <br />Kalmbach in July 1965, for tbe Upper Colorado River Commission revealed tbat <br /> <br />they too used the Bureau's Virgin Flows as a basis for the determination. In <br /> <br />essence, they used a shailar approach but solved the equation for Useahle <br /> <br />Storage. they did this using two delivery assumptions - 7.5 KAF and 8.25 KAF, <br /> <br />and varied the depletion level in each one. they then plotted Upper Basin <br /> <br />depletion vs. required storage. With an assumed available storage of 29.0 KAF, <br /> <br />their plotted curves yielded a 5.6 KAF depletion vith a delivery of 8.25 KAF to <br /> <br />tbe Lower Basin and 6.3 KAF with a delivery of 7.5 KAF. Using tbe computerized <br /> <br />foraula with the Virgin Flows, zero sbortage, 29.0 KAF of ,available storage and <br /> <br />a 7.5 KAF delivery, an allowable depletion of 6.3 KAF was derived; with a deli- <br /> <br />very of 8.25 KAF the depletion was comp~ted at 5.6 KAF tbuI verifying tbe Tipton <br /> <br />'"' <br /> <br />t-:,' <br />to <br />t:. <br />~.f: <br /> <br />, <br />, <br />L <br />i:;. <br />!!", <br />i': <br />h. <br />~~. I <br /> <br />if-: <br />;;"" <br />f._; <br />" <br />I. <br />!~... <br /> <br />~ <br />',/_. <br />r <br />~: <br />~. <br />~' <br /> <br />~~ <br />~<. <br /> <br />t <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />..7- <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />K <br />~: <br />t <br />r <br />f <br /> <br />~~" <br />.{''- <br />~ <br />~' <br />i:,,',. <br />, <br />~. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />I,' <br />" <br /> <br />:" <br />