My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP12648
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1001-2000
>
WSP12648
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:18:51 PM
Creation date
2/19/2008 1:06:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8221.109
Description
Colorado River Basin Projects - Long Hollow
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
3/17/2004
Author
Wright Water Engineers
Title
Operation Plan for Proposed Long Hollow Reservoir - Preliminary Draft - 03-17-04
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.
/
29
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 />001074 <br /> <br />Operation Plan for the Proposed Long Hollow Reservoir-Preliminary Draft, March 17, 2004 <br /> <br />period, the average amount of water stored (Compact Pool plus District Pool) in LHR was 3,540 <br />AF for Scenario 1 and 2,962 AF for Scenario 2 (see Figure 8). <br /> <br />4.3 Modeled Allocations <br /> <br />When New Mexico called for water in the spring, the allocation model distributed water to the <br />State Line gauge and Colorado ditches according to water right priority. The highest (most <br />senior) priority was assigned to New Mexico. Releases from LHR were used to meet the <br />Compact demands at the State Line Gauge and Colorado ditches divert native flows in the La <br />Plata River according to priority and by exchange. Colorado ditch diversions made under this <br />exchange are defined as incremental diversions. Native flows from the La Plata River basin that <br />could not be exchanged to Colorado ditches were used to meet Compact demands. Otherwise, <br />Compact deliveries were provided from the District Pool in LHR. <br /> <br />Incremental agricultural diversions exchanged are presented by year and an average for the 14- <br />year study period was calculated using the model (see Table 3). Average incremental diversions <br />for each ditch that receives exchange water are shown in Table 4. This exchange and reservoir <br />releases are discussed later under reservoir operations. <br /> <br />5.0 IRRIGATED LAND <br /> <br />Lands irrigated by the 18 Colorado ditches that receive incremental diversions are shown in <br />Figure 7. Irrigated lands are located in Cherry Creek, Hay Gulch, and Red Mesa. More than _ <br />acres of land are available for irrigation by the ditches if there is sufficient water supply. <br />However, Colorado's portion of La Plata River flows is insufficient to provide a full irrigation <br />supply to all available lands due to the timing and amount of stream flows in all years except <br />very wet 'years. The four most senior ditches (Hay Gulch, La Plata Irrigating Ditch, Big Stick, <br />and La Plata & Cherry Creek Ditch) have decreed water rights totaling 74.25 cfs. Accounting for <br />Compact obligation, approximately 150 cfs is needed at the Hesperus Gauge to fully satisfy these <br /> <br />991-077.000 <br />March 2004 <br /> <br />Wright Water Engineers, Inc. <br /> <br />Page 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.