PUB00068 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

\ . -45- . ing from such inefficient use are not readily apparent to the water users.. This prevents them from visualizing concrete, mutual benefits which would result from certain changes in the uses of water which could be made among users. However, in connection. with recently constructed multiple purpose projects, as we~l as those under construction and those proposed for construction, by much effort in ascertaining the benefits which would be derived by certain changes in uses, by education, and by broad think- ing and cooperation on the part of the water users, desirable changes are being brought about in some localities. Much of the substance of that which I have given above was contained in a talk which I made before the Association of Western state Engineers on October 12, 1942. I should like now to quote from a section of the paper prepared for that talk: . "I wish to give some concrete examples of some situations which exist in Colorado. These are to illustrate some of the points which I have brought out concerning the better use of water that might be brought about by consolidations and storage. "Exhibits A, B, and C indicate the diversions of water in acre-feet per acre by months in a typical year of three typical ditches in Colorado which irrigate an aggregate of 50,000 acres. These ditches divert from the same side of the river, and the headgates are within a few miles of one another. The ditch covering the land closest to the river, having an early water right, has more than sufficient water at all times. The inter- mediate ditch has a water right which is junior in character but is not so poor as the upper ditch. From a physical stand- point, it would be easy to consolidate the systems, diverting the water through the upper ditch. Exhibit A indicates the amount of water actually diverted by the senior ditch during a typical year, as compared with the assumed ideal requirement for that year. The water that was diverted in excess of the assumed firm requirements may be noted. Exhibit B represents the diversions of the intermediate ditch. It may be noted that the diversions are somewhat distorted as compared with the ideal demand. This is true to a greater extent with .the upper ditch, as is shown by Exhibit C. "Exhibit D indicates what the diversions would have been in acre-feet per acre had the thr:ee water rights been combined and had the water been diverted through the upper ditch and distributed on a pro-rata basis. The improvement may be readily noted. The combined supply of the three ditches results in an almost perfect water supply for the combined acreage. The excess water diverted by the lower ditch does not increase crop produ~tion on the acreage under that ditch nearly to the extent that the production would be increased if that water were used to improve the water supply of the two adjacent ditches. "It must be recognized that the process of bringing about a consolidation of ditches, such as these three, would not be limited to getting an agreement of the water users under the three ditches to consolidate. Before changes in point of diver- sion could be made to the upper ditch, it would be necessary to .. . ..