Laserfiche WebLink
<br />onl~'fti. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />size of the diversion canal to take care of only these two high flows. <br /> <br /> <br />There were three spills that occurred on the Little Navajo River and <br /> <br /> <br />the same reasoning applies. On the Rio Blanco there were spills in <br /> <br />eight years of the sixteen studied. It appears from this frequent <br /> <br />occurrence of spills that the diversion capacity of the Rio Blanco <br /> <br /> <br />canal should be increased. These spills take place in May and June, <br /> <br /> <br />the months of high flow, and with the required by-pass that has been <br /> <br /> <br />agreed to by Colorado for protection of downstream rights in low flow <br /> <br /> <br />months, there appears to be no reason why the diversion capaCity <br /> <br /> <br />of the Rio Blanco canal should not be increased. The average <br /> <br /> <br />annual spill at the Rio Blanco diversion dam site was 4,400 acre.,. <br /> <br />feet, with the largest spill occurring in 1957 following four years in <br /> <br />which the water supply was about 50% of the contemplated average <br /> <br />annual diversion. As a result of the previous four years of adverse <br /> <br />water supply, Heron No.4 reservoir would have been empty fo!;" two <br />years of 1955 and 1956. <br /> <br /> <br />A monthly check was run on the collection system by operat- <br /> <br /> <br />ing the recommended conduit system during the high flow months of <br /> <br /> <br />May, June and July. The operation was based on the assumption that <br /> <br /> <br />surface runoff and tunnel seepage would offset canal losses and <br /> <br /> <br />evaporation and that monthly flows were the accumulation of equal <br /> <br /> <br />daily flows. The collection was started with the Navajo River diver, <br /> <br />sion site, then the Little Navajo River flows were added to the system. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />- 13 - <br /> <br />" <br />