My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09605
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09605
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:54:44 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:45:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8102
Description
Arkansas River Basin
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
3/18/1941
Author
Unknown
Title
General Statement Concerning the Chalk Creek Area
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.
/
14
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 />001515 <br /> <br />with a oapaoity of from 3.000 to 4.000 aore feet. <br />The first need is a detailed survey of the proposed dam <br />site, Also an investigation should be made as to the possibility of <br />other reservoir sites on Chalk Creek whioh might be more feasible. <br />Study of irrigation requiremmts together with an analysis <br />of return flowS' are also needed in order to determine the effeot of <br />any proposed development on water supplies available for downstream <br />USe. Prosent irrigation praotices within the arow. might be ohanged so <br />t!ul.t a moreeconomioal use of the water oould be aocomplished. <br />It is maintained by residents of the. area that conaumptive <br />use rates are low on suoh lands and that return flows from irrigation. <br />beoome of major importanoe to downstream users, The North Park investi~ <br />gations of the Colorado Water Conservation Board show the consumptive <br />use in that area to be 0.80 aore feet per acre of whioh 0.7~ aore feet <br />is chargeable to agricultural lands, The Chalk Creek area would pro- <br />bably be somewhat higher, but conditions are similar within the two areas. <br />Whilf!l demands on the river by irr:l.l1lLtion in the Ch8.1k: Creek arelll would be <br />negligible, it must be admitted that any increase in irrigation would <br />increase the amount consumed, Acorued benefits from return flows' to <br />downstream users might be considere4 in justifying upstream development, <br />ll!. EClonomio feasibilitJ:., No major ohanges in the present <br />land use eoonomy of the area should be oontemplated. The area is well <br />suited for ranohing operations and the produotion of forage orops <br />with some small grains. Consequently it is doubtful if the average <br />gross inoome per acre of the irrigated lands would exoeed $15 per acre. <br /> <br />"'1- <br /> <br />.~-~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.