Laserfiche WebLink
Figure 4 <br />Barnes Meadow Reservoir End-of-Month Contents <br />3,000 <br />2,500 <br />2,000 <br />~, <br />0 <br />~' 1,500 <br />w <br />O <br />1,000 <br />500 <br />0 ~ N ~ ~ <br />~n ~n ~n ~n ~q `4 `4 ~ ~ ~ o0 00 00 00 0~ o~ o~ q <br />ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti -~ ti ti <br />Date <br />3) Greeley's High Mountain Reservoir System <br />Greeley has four high mountain reservoirs -three located on tributaries to the South Fork Cache <br />la Poudre River and one (Peterson Lake) located on a tributary to the main stem Cache la Poudre <br />River (see Figure 1). Similar to Barnes Meadow Reservoir, Peterson Lake is located on a <br />tributary to the main stem Cache la Poudre River although it does not share the operational <br />characteristics of Barnes Meadow Reservoir. Operationally, Peterson Lake is similar to <br />Greeley's three storage units on the South Fork Cache la Poudre River; therefore, for modeling <br />purposes, it is recommended to aggregate Peterson Lake with the three other high-mountain <br />reservoirs on South Fork Cache la Poudre River, even though available inflows on the two <br />tributary river systems may be different. <br />The four high-mountain reservoirs have a total active storage capacity of approximately 5,800 <br />ac-ft. These storage units were constructed in the early-1900s. Comanche Reservoir, Hourglass <br />Reservoir, and Twin Lake Reservoir are held back by earthen dams. Peterson Lake is held back <br />by a roller compacted concrete dam. Seepage losses from Comanche Reservoir and Hourglass <br />Reservoir are considered high. Seepage losses from Twin Lake Reservoir and Peterson Lake are <br />considered low. The Water Commissioner does not charge the City for evaporative losses from <br />these reservoirs. Due to deterioration of the dams and other issues associated with storage units <br />at high elevations, the high mountain reservoirs were rehabilitated at different times throughout <br />Page 8 of 21 <br />