Laserfiche WebLink
<br />,'.:.'. <br />":'.'.' <br />':.:.!:.:~ <br /> <br />C',) <br />':) <br />~ <br />(2' <br />~ <br />l\J <br /> <br />22 <br /> <br />F. M. Bell's recommendations for Great Plains inflow. <br /> <br />Outflow from the reservoir included releases at the <br /> <br />dam and evaporation from the reservoir water surface. <br /> <br />Headgate diversion shortages were determined by deduct- <br /> <br />ing the diversion requirements from the amount of water <br /> <br />available for diversion at the headgate of the Colorado <br /> <br />ditches. <br /> <br />stateline flows were the sums of return flow <br /> <br />and other accretions between the dam and the stateline. <br /> <br />any releases which had to be passed by Colorado water <br /> <br />users to meet the required stateline deliveries. and <br /> <br />any excesses of releases over diversion requirements. <br /> <br />The flow chart and the computer program that were used <br /> <br />in the mOdel are shown in figures 6 and 7. <br /> <br />The amount of unmeasured inflow into John Martin <br /> <br />Reservoir was estimated by calculating a water budget <br /> <br />on a daily basis for compact years 1967-71 in which <br /> <br />unmeasured inflow was the result after the total mea- <br /> <br />sured inflow was deducted from the sum of the outflow <br /> <br />and the increase in storage. The period. 1967-71. was <br /> <br />selected because it was considered as fairly represen- <br /> <br />tative of the entire study period. The daily inflow <br /> <br />terms were the measured flows of the Arkansas and <br />