PUB00047 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Final Draft - Preferred Storage Options Plan Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District June 8, 2000 The Arkansas River Above Pueblo gage is located just downstream of Pueblo Reservoir approximately 7 miles west of Pueblo, and is upstream of Pueblo Board of Water Works' existing water treatment plant diversions. Figure 3.4 shows the average monthly historical and simulated discharge at the Above Pueblo gage for the average of all scenarios. The simulated mean monthly stream flow shows little difference compared to the historical mean monthly stream flow. The absolute minimum simulated stream flow at the gage is 49 cfs in April of 1982 under Scenario A. It should be noted that although the Pueblo Board of Water Works currently diverts below the Above Pueblo gage, the model was developed with the Pueblo diversion taken directly out of Pueblo Reservoir in accordance with future plans. However, the resulting decrease in flow at the gage is generally offset due to the increase in demand from those entities east of Pueblo, which require additional releases to be made from Pueblo Reservoir. Future agricultural diversions are generally assumed to be the same as historical agricultural diversions. As shown on Figure 3.5, little change in flow regime is predicted at the Avondale gage. Stream flows in Fountain Creek are expected to increase substantially (Figure 3.6). In gcneral, it was found that there are few limitations and no hydrologic or operational fatal flaws for the storage alternatives evaluated. However, additional information which u,~c rnncl~pr".r1 in thp Qltprrl"lt-tHPC' p,,~ll1'lt;"n ~'ln hp ;.....+Qo..-rOrl h.-.......,....., tho ..............rtol;......... 1"'O<'lIlTco .....-.. ""'"'.&....&~..,&""'..... "'.J. u..... .....11....J.J.U...u......... ......................V.1. ....'...1..11 v.... ,u.u.............. ""1 VIII u..... 1..V........11116 ....."'I.lI...>, as follows: . Re-operations: The effective storage for re-operations (Scenario B) is approximately 48,000 to 51,000 af, with the storage volume highly dependent upon the location of structural storage improvements that the volulT)~ would replace. A volume of 48,500 af accounts for slightly more than 50 percent of the total storage request of the entities participating in re-operations. . Pueblo Reservoir Enlar!!ement: Pueblo Reservoir can be utilized through its full range of potential storage enlargements. Pueblo Reservoir allows the most flexibility for exercise of water rights, exchanges, and general water delivery. . Turquoise Reservoir Enlargement: The model shows that with the inflow locations given and the potential for exchange of storage from Twin Lakes to Turquoise Reservoir, there is adequate inflow to fill Turquoise and keep the reservoir full during most months of the simulation. Evaporation from Turquoise Reservoir is less than from other Arkansas Basin reservoirs. However, due to channel losses in the Arkansas River, some of this lower evaporation loss is offset by increased channel losses. m GEl Consultants, Inc. 3-24 l\PROJECTS\99061\RepoT1$\P'ref~ SOP FinaI,wpd