WSP12671 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . 8 Losses and Gains for Eight Unlined Canals Along the Purgatoire River near Trinidad, Colorado, 2000-2004 Table 1. Measurement site identification, canal name, distance downstream from canal headgate, site description, diversion type, flume size, latitude, and longitude for eight unlined canals along the Purgatoire River near Trinidad, Colorado.-Continued [Site lD. site identification; PW, Picketwire Canal; HG, headgate; NA. not applicable; BA, Baca Canal; EM, EI Mom Canal: CH. Chilili Canal; END, end of canal; 55, Enlarged Southside CanaL SP. Pala<;ki Extension of Enlarged Southside Canal; SW. Wagner Extension of Enlarged Southside Canal; SSS, Enlarged Southside Canal Splitter; DO, bifurcation point; MO, Model Canal; --, missing value; JF, John Rood Canal; WO, waste gate; HO, Hoehne Canal) Distance downstream Site Diversion Flume SilelD Canal name from canal headgate description type size Latitude Longitude (miles) JFOI John Flood Canal 0.0 Lateral diversion Parshall tlume 9 inch 37.236 -104.438 JF02 John Flood Canal 1.2 Lateral diversion Parshall tlume 9 inch 37.244 -104.422 JF03 John Flood Canal 1.5 LaLeral diversion Parshall Hume 9 inch 37.248 -104.418 JF04 John Flood Canal 1.6 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.248 -104.418 JF05 John Flood Canal 1.7 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.250 -104.418 JF06 John Flood Canal 1.8 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.251 -104.419 JFWG John Flood Canal 1.8 Waste gate NA NA 37.252 -104.419 JF07A John Flood Canal 1.8 Lateral diversion Parshall tlame 37.252 -104.419 JF07 John Flood Canal 2.0 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.253 -104.417 JF08 John Flood Canal 2.3 Lateral diversion Parshall Hume 9 inch 37.255 -104.413 JF09 John Flood Canal 24 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.257 -104.412 JFIO John Flood Canal 2.6 Lateral diversion Parshall tlume 9 inch 37.259 -104.411 JFll John Flood Canal 2.8 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.262 -104.409 JFl2 John Flood Canal 3.3 Lateral diversion Parshall tlume 18 inch 37.267 -104.406 JFI3 John Flood Canal 4.3 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 12 inch 37.276 -104.404 JFI4 John Flood Canal 4.3 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.276 -104.404 JFI5 John Flood Canal 4.4 Lateral diversion Site not used NA 37.278 -104.406 JF16 John Flood Canal 4.4 Lateral diversion Parshallllume 9 inch 37.278 -104.406 JFI7 John Flood Canal 6.1 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.294 -104.406 JFI8 John Flood Canal 6.1 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.294 -104.406 JFI9 John Flood Canal 6.2 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.296 -104.405 JF20 John Flood Canal 6.5 Lateral diversion Parshall Harne 9 inch 37.299 -104.402 JF21 John Flood Canal 6.5 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9incl1 37.299 -104.40f JF22 John Flood Canal 6.8 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.303 -104.400 JF23 John Flood Canal 8.1 Lateral diversion Parshall Hume 9 inch 37.309 -104.400 JF24 John Flood Canal 8.3 Lateral diversion Parshall flume 9 inch 37.310 -104.397 JF25 John Flood Canal 8.4 Lateral diversion Parshall Hume 9 inch 37.311 -104.396 HOHG Hoehne Canal 0.0 Headgate.t1ume Parshall tlume 4 feet 37.250 -104.403 HOI Hoehne Canal 2.8 Lateral diversion Box splitter NA 37.280 -104.379 H02 Hoehne Canal 3.2 Lateral diversion Box splitter NA 37.279 -104.371 H02A Hoehne Canal Lateral diversion Box splitter NA H03 Hoehne Canal 4.2 Lateral diversion Box splitter NA 37.283 -104.355 H04 Hoehne Canal 4.7 Lateral diversion Box splitter NA 37.285 -104.347 each day was repeated as the first measurement site the next day to check that steady-flow conditions existed in the canal. Steady-flow conditions were assumed to exist if flow in the canal had not changed by more than 5 percent from the pre- ceding day, 1n addition to direct measurements of canal discharge, estimates also were made at selected sites for several reasons: (I) discharge (usually leakage) was too low to measure, or (2) measured discharge at selected laterals was comparable to discharge estimated based on channel geometry during the first measurement period and, thus, estimates (based on channel geometry) were used in subsequent measurement periods to save time. Leakage was measured/estimated using a variety of methods: ( I) vertical-axis mechanical current meter, (2) bucket method, (3) noat method, or (4) visual observation. Current-meter measurements ofleakage often were made using fewer cross sections (verticals) than recommended (Rantz and others, 1982) due to low-now conditions. For this reason, these measurements were coded as estimated. Also discharge measurements made using the bucket method, float method, and visual observation were coded as estimated. Split- ter boxes arc the most commonly used method to divert flow from the main canal to laterals (see tig. 3 for an example of a splitter hox). Estimates of the diverted discharge to the later- als were made by (1) measuring flow in the main canal just upstream from the lateral (spliller hox), (2) measuring the total width of the main canal and lalerals and, (3) proportioning the total now measured upstream from the lateral on the basis of the width of the lateral.