Laserfiche WebLink
3. The Committee should be commended for this very <br />complete and well prepared report. <br />4. It is noted that the title for the curves prepared <br />by this office and listed on page ix should be given as <br />'Drainage Area - Runoff Relationships' rather than 'Drainage <br />Area in Acres'. <br />5. The title of Table 3, page 41, and given in the Table <br />of Contents page x, should read, "Runoff in stock ponds in <br />Upper Cheyenne River Basin, (Wyoming, instead of '. . . . <br />Colorado% <br />5. In the discussion of evaporation rates on page 46 <br />they state that the coefficient to be applied to pan evaporation <br />varies from 0.70 to 0.95, and suggest using 0.85 are a fair <br />average. In the studies made by this office of the evaporation <br />losses in the Arkansas River Basin, a pan coe ficient of 0.70 <br />was used. There appears to be a possibility that our coefficient <br />was too low. It is therefore suggested that we review our <br />evaporation studies to determine if 0.70 pan coefficient was <br />appropriate. <br />K <br />