My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP12729
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
WSP12729
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:17:54 PM
Creation date
10/11/2007 12:21:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8155.915.B.2
Description
Chaffee County RICD- Water Court Filing, Discovery - Expert Reports
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
9/20/1996
Author
EDAW
Title
Arkansas River Water Needs Assessment Recreation Report (Draft)
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.
/
22
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 />When asked about safety, a higher percentage of the respondents tended to indicate that <br />conditions were unsatisfactory or very unsatisfactory at lower water levels. This trend is <br />displayed in Figure 5.21. These results suggest that there is somewhat of a threshold water <br />level between 4848 and 4860 at which safety concerns are significantly reduced. A similar <br />threshold is displayed in Figure 5.22 which displays user perceptions regarding shoreline <br />access. These results indicate that a significantly higher percentage of the users are satisfied <br />With shoreline access at water levels of 4860 and higher. <br /> <br />When asked if they would prefer water levels that were higher, lower, or the same, users <br />generally indicated a preference for higher levels when the lakes were at their lowest and the <br />same levels when the lakes were at their highest. These results are displayed in Figure 5.23 <br />which shows the percentage of respondents choosing either the same or higher/much higher <br />'at each of the surveyed water elevations at Pueblo Reservoir. These results indicate that <br />users, when given a choice, prefer more water in the reservoir. <br /> <br />Finally, Figure 5.24 shows how respondent s overall recreation experience changed <br />according to changing water levels at Pueblo Reservoir. These results indicate a definite <br />preference for water levels greater than 4848. Surprisingly, they also show that an increase <br />in water level from 4860 to 4880 a difference of 20 ) did not make a significant difference <br />in the overall quality of the experience. In fact; the higher water levels were rated, on <br />average, slightly lower than the 4860 level. This suggests that increased water levels above <br />4860 may not have a directly proportional benefit in terms of recreation opportunities or <br />experiences at Pueblo Reservoir. <br /> <br />Arkansas River Water Needs Assessment' <br />Recreation Report - Draft <br /> <br />Page 18 <br />, September 20, 1996 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.