My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Hydrologic Effects of Reducing Irrigation to Maintain a Permanent Pool
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
4001-5000
>
Hydrologic Effects of Reducing Irrigation to Maintain a Permanent Pool
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/19/2010 1:24:00 PM
Creation date
6/28/2010 4:24:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
ARCA
State
CO
KS
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
1/1/1975
Author
U.S. Geologic Survey, Richard R. Luckey, CWCB, State Engineer, Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District
Title
Hydrologic Effects of Reducing Irrigation to Maintain a Permanent Pool
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.
/
27
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
o 1 3 0 <br /> I• <br />Under.the.proposed change in water use, the Divison's water would be <br />diverted at the Catlin headgate and carried through the canal system. <br />This water would then be spilled into one of two tributaries to the <br />Arkansas River at the lower end of the canal system. The water then <br />travels about 35 miles (56 km) down the Arkansas River to John Martin <br />Reservoir. Under Colorado law, a natural stream can be used to convey <br />water for reservoir owners, but natural losses must be accounted for <br />(Radosevich and Hamburg, 1971). The Colorado State Engineer charges <br />0.07 percent per mile loss for the Arkansas River. A charge of 2.5 <br />percent is made against the water still assigned to the Division for <br />this loss. The water charged for river loss remains in the river and the <br />water still assigned to the Division of Wildlife is stored in John Martin <br />Reservoir. <br />The Catlin Canal imports water from outside of the area. Imported <br />water is not subject to the priority system and is not counted against <br />the canal's demand by the model. In the simulation,,_rhe Divi.sipn_of <br />Wildlife did not claim its 11.24 percent of the Catlin's _ imp.or -ted- water. <br />The Catlin Canal was not allowed to increase its demand for water <br />because of the change in use of part of the water, nor were well owners <br />under the canal allowed to pump water to make up the shares that were <br />sold to the Division of Wildlife. <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.