My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09218
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09218
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:52:02 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:31:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.765
Description
Little Snake River General
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
7/31/1990
Author
Western Water Consul
Title
Final Report on Little Snake River Depletions by Pot Hook - Three Forks - and Powder Wash Rights
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
152
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I' <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />O(}Jgn <br /> <br />The USBR Definite Plan Report operation studies for Pot Hook Reservoir and <br /> <br />Pot Hook Canal used a lesser annual irrigation demand of 35,800 acre-feet. This demand <br /> <br />was based upon consumptive use and varied from month to month as follows: <br /> <br />USBR Pot Hook Canal Demands, c.f.s. <br /> <br />May June Julv August September <br />24 148 205 161 48 <br /> <br />Since there is not enough water to meet the decreed amount each month, it was <br /> <br /> <br />decided that the Pot Hook Canal diversion demand defined in the USBR Definite Plan <br /> <br /> <br />Report should be used in this study. It should also be noted that the USBR operation <br /> <br /> <br />study did not include demands by Two Bar Canal, Boone Lateral, Deer Lodge Lateral and <br /> <br /> <br />instream flow requirements. For Scenario No. I, these demands were included and were <br /> <br />modeled as defined in Section 3.0 of this report. Scenario No. lA modeled the system <br /> <br />without these rights calling on reservoir storage. Scenario No. IB modeled the system <br /> <br />without these rights calling on reservoir storage but with a larger reservoir at Pot Hook <br /> <br />(100,000 AF total storage). <br />Even with the lower USBR demands, Scenario No. 1 runs showed irrigation <br /> <br />shortages were experienced every year and the active storage in Pot Hook Reservoir was <br /> <br />depleted every year. The USBR operation study showed shortages experienced only 5 out <br /> <br />of the 17 years in their study period (1952-68). The reasons for this descrepancy are not <br /> <br />apparent and were not pursued. <br /> <br />37 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.