|
<br />~ t'
<br />"',
<br />
<br />""fhe average water production per square mile above the White
<br />Biver gage at Meeker for the 40-year period, 1917_!J:.!.:~'ough 1956,
<br />was 600 acre-feet, with elevations ranging from' 4,950 to 12,000
<br />feet. The average production per square mile above the South Fork
<br />gage at Bufol d during the same years was 1,166 acre-feet, with
<br />elevations ranging from 6,970 to 12,000 feet. As precipitation in
<br />Colorado has consistently proven to be greater at high elevations,
<br />it was necesEary to take into account the variation of,water pro-
<br />duction due to altitude. Elevation 9250 was chosen as a breaking
<br />point in water production rates because it is the elevation above
<br />which water is collected to serve the Sweetwater Powerplant.
<br />Exhibit I, page IS, shows the drainage areas above the two gaging
<br />stations, the drainage areas above the project, and significant
<br />drainage areas above and below elevation 9250.
<br />
<br />Although the gage records clearly confirm that the higher altitudes
<br />produce more water, there was insufficient basic data to obtain a
<br />proven factor for determining the production above and below the
<br />9250-foot project elevation. As an expediency and pending further
<br />stream gaging to be accomplished as the project progresses, it
<br />was aes'lmed that the average production per square mile from
<br />elevations 9L.50 to 12,000 is 50 percent more than that from 6970
<br />to 9250 in the South Fork Valley.
<br />
<br />Allowances were made for consumptive use, losses to evaporation
<br />in irrigation practices, and certain evapo- transpiration by weeds
<br />and willows above the South Fork gaging station in determining the
<br />virgin flow 2.t project diversion points.
<br />
<br />Based on records and assumptions explained above, the following
<br />table shows the average water production per square mile and for
<br />each area:
<br />
<br />Area 1
<br />Area 2
<br />Area 3, above elev. 9250 (Dry
<br />Sweetwater Creek) 4.0
<br />TOTAL produced above Sweetwater Power plant
<br />Area 3:
<br />Above 9250 less Dry Sweetwater Ck.
<br />Below 9250
<br />
<br />Average Water
<br />
<br />Area
<br />
<br />TOTAL produced above Dotsero Powerplant
<br />
<br />2111
<br />
<br />Production
<br />Area
<br />sq.mi.
<br />79.6
<br />20.5
<br />
<br />Acre-feet
<br />!sq.mi. total
<br />1,290 102,680
<br />1,290 26,440
<br />
<br />1,290
<br />
<br />5,160
<br />134,280
<br />
<br />17.6
<br />14,7
<br />
<br />1,290
<br />855
<br />
<br />22,700
<br />12,600
<br />
<br />169,580
<br />
<br />In studies made to determine the optimum size of project features,
<br />it was determined to be uneconomical to regulate all of the water
<br />for project use. These studies developed that on)y 95 percent of
<br />the water available could be economically regulated Lor project
<br />use.
<br />
<br />Water evaporation losses, releases to streams, and r:=leases for
<br />irrigation are deducted to determine the amount of water available
<br />for project use. nesults of these studies are shown below:
<br />
<br />Sweetwater Powerplant;
<br />Description
<br />Water Produced
<br />Water controlled (134,280 x 950/,)
<br />helease to streams
<br />Evaporation (Meadows :;'eservoir)
<br />Irrigation
<br />Total releases and losses
<br />
<br />TOTAL controlled for project use
<br />
<br />Ac. -ft.
<br />
<br />Ac. -ft.
<br />134,280
<br />127,570
<br />
<br />8,760
<br />1,740
<br />1,440
<br />
<br />11',940
<br />115,630
<br />
<br />13
<br />
|