Laserfiche WebLink
<br />;j <br /> <br />PARSHALL PROJECT. COLORADO <br /> <br />Usable return flow <br /> <br />Return flows from project water delivered to lands under the Skylark <br />and Parshall Flats Canals and to lands above the Skylark Canal by exchange <br />would be reusable on lower lands in the project area. It is estimated <br />that 30 percent of the water diverted into the two canals would be <br />reusable during the irrigation season. Of the amount reusable it is <br />estimated that 40 percent would become available in the month of initial <br />application, and 30. 20, and 10 percent in each of the next 3 months, <br />respectively. <br /> <br />Project water rights <br /> <br />A conditional right for the storage of 73,248 acre-feet of ~lilliams <br />Fork River water annually in the Ute Park Reservoir has been decreed to <br />the Middle Park Water Conservancy District. This right with a priority <br />date of September 8, 1954. would be available to the project. The Big <br />Lake Ditch Company has expressed a willingness to assign to the project <br />its conditional decreed right to divert 159 second-feet of water from <br />the Williams Fork River for irrigation. This conditional right has a <br />priority date of September 1. 1904; Claim should be made for an addi- <br />tional natural flow right for water to be diverted into the Skylark Canal <br />if project development under Plan I is found .to be justified. <br /> <br />In the project operation studies it was assumed that project rights <br />for the Ute Park Reservoir under either of the plans would be senior to <br />the power right of the city and county of Denver for the ~li1liams Fork <br />Powerplant. Under Plan I project rights were assumed to have priority <br />over Denver's rights for its Blue River diversion plan. In Plan II the <br />Denver Blue River diversion plan was assumed to have priority of rights <br />over the project. <br /> <br />Project water operation studies <br /> <br />Simulated project operation studies were made for both project plans <br />based on available water supplies, water rights, and irrigation require- <br />ments per acre previously explaine,d. In estimating present irrigation <br />supplies on project lands it was considered that the absolute rights of <br />the Big Lake ditch for 205 second-feet, including the30-second-foot <br />right of Coberly Brothers, are fully valid. An average of 210 acre-feet <br />of water annUally was assumed to be presently utilized under the 159- <br />second-foot conditional right of the Big Lake ditch, leaving the remain- <br />ing water under the right available for project development. Neither <br />operation study included provision for the release of water at Ute Park <br />Reservoir solely for the benefit of the river fiShery. Annual operation <br />summaries for each of the two plans are tabulated on the following page. <br />Additional data. on the effects of the plans are tabulated on page 20. <br /> <br />18 <br />