Laserfiche WebLink
<br />! <br /> <br />661 for Hyannis) which has a conditional decree for <br />more storage than Hyannis might not have allocation <br />enough to fill; yet in the last ten years it would <br />have had adequate storage space under the United <br />States Supreme Court case. It thus appears that <br />the North Platte litigation presents minimal<risk <br />to the storage of water at Hyannis. <br /> <br />, <br />! <br /> <br />In addition to the conditional storage rights <br />for Hyannis reservoir, there are five ditches with <br />diversion rights which draw from Arapahoe Creek. <br />These are the Arapahoe, Eureka, Titanic, Cochrane, <br />and Experimental Ditches (see Sheet 1 for location). <br />Table III lists the appropriation dates and priority <br />numbers for these ditches. <br /> <br />,"; <br /> <br />DITCH NAME <br /> <br />ARAPAHOE <br /> <br />COCHRANE <br />EUREKA <br />TITANIC <br /> <br />EXPERIMENTAL <br /> <br />Table IV is a general planning schedule of week- <br />ly diversions from the first four ditches. It shows <br />a total annual diversion from the middle fork of <br />Arapahoe Creek of 9,947 acre-feet. Analysis of this <br />schedule in conjunction with streamflow projections <br />shows that a schedule such as this should approximate <br />the storage, irrigation diversion, and reservoir <br />operation needs of the project <br /> <br />D. Water Utilization <br /> <br />In order to estimate the availability of water <br />for the Hyannis project, the flow data and irrigation <br />diversion requirements from the middle fork of Arapa- <br />hoe Creek must be considered. <br /> <br />A graphic estimate of storage availability is <br />made by Figure 4. This graph uses as a base the <br />"best estimate"'average monthly flows for Arapahoe <br />Creek developed in Figure 3. The irrigation <br />requirements of Table lV are also plotted. The <br />shaded area, where flows exceed irrigation demands, <br />