Laserfiche WebLink
<br />000836 <br /> <br />-18- <br /> <br />9. The Hinde!lider Plan (Cont~ <br /> <br />Total Diversions i~cr9 Fest l:1opth1L <br />12_Q,itch_s.!!" in _Dis',;r;,cts l~_i:q,c:',-L <br />~Dlpi_l,e,cl .f!!,m Daily (AV;)A),(';por~'; <br /> <br /> Diver sions <br /> ----- Historio Dif.fer- <br />llonths In 1943 AV~":...ges eno as <br />April 63,056 40.060 +22,996 <br />Hay 80.066 86.240 - 6,174 <br />June 108.673 130.150 -21,477 <br />July 91.382 ,1.93.030 -11,646 <br />4-l1onths 343.177 359.480 -16.303 <br /> <br />I-/hethsr total diversions in 1943 wore above average, as indi- <br /> <br />oo.ted by the Hinderlider comparison. or below average. as shom above, <br /> <br />is unimportant. Such departures from average total diversions oannot, <br /> <br />in any event, be attributed to Caddoa Reservoir. for the reason that, <br /> <br />included in the total diversion values, and mer~ed with the effects of <br /> <br />Oaddoa Reservoir, are the effeots of departures from average amounts <br /> <br />of river, return. stored and imported waters. <br /> <br />The Hinderlider plan, of comparing the total diversions of any <br /> <br />one ditch or any group of ditches upstream from Caddoa. in anyone month <br /> <br />or season. with their historic average total diversions. is not applica- <br /> <br />ble to the problem of determining the upstream benefits and injuries or <br /> <br />the effects of Caddoa Reservoir operations on upstream diversions. To <br /> <br />demonstrate the inapplicability of such a plan, consider the records for <br /> <br />seasons prior to the oonstruotion of Caddon Dam when, of course. the <br /> <br />ei'i'oots of its operations were nil. For example. - the total diversions <br />