Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I I <br /> <br />I. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Implementation of District water rights could yield more water to the <br /> <br /> <br />service areas according to our analysis. An operation study was performed to <br /> <br /> <br />determine the actual physical and legal yield to District priorities at <br /> <br /> <br />diversion locations for the Cone and Gurley collection systems. Actual use of <br /> <br /> <br />the rights would require a change in the decreed point of diversion. <br /> <br />Water supply was based on procedures described above in Section 4.3. <br /> <br /> <br />Senior decree holders were afforded their share according to recorded historic <br /> <br /> <br />diversion patterns and expected intervening flow below the project diversion <br /> <br /> <br />points. Senior water right diversion points are shown on straight-line <br /> <br /> <br />diagrams which are included in Appendix B. Many senior water rights which are <br /> <br /> <br />not associated with one of the major ditch companies show interrupted diversion <br /> <br /> <br />histories indicating either non-use, structure failure, or lack of water. Some <br /> <br /> <br />divert from small tributaries to the major creeks and would not be affected by <br /> <br /> <br />increased diversions on the main stem upstream. Many may actually benefit from <br /> <br /> <br />increased return flow caused by greater water application in the ditch company <br /> <br />service areas. <br /> <br />A summary of the expected yields to District water rights is shown as <br /> <br /> <br />Table 4.5 (c). Two important assumption should be considered. First, <br /> <br /> <br />diversion and conveyance structures would have to be maintained in good <br /> <br /> <br />condition to allow capacities as large as recorded maximums (approximately 400 <br /> <br /> <br />cfs in the Naturita Canal and 100 cfs in the Cone collection ditch). Second, a <br /> <br /> <br />small retention reservoir may be required on one of the Beaver Creek Forks to <br /> <br /> <br />allow regulation of diurnal fluctuations during the peak runoff season. <br /> <br /> <br />Streamflows can fluctuate, as much as 200 or 300 cfs daily during peak runoff. <br /> <br /> <br />A detention storage capacity of 200-400 acre-feet would allow peaks on <br /> <br /> <br />different creeks to be staggered and encourage operation of the Naturita Canal <br /> <br /> <br />at capacity over the entire 24-hour period. <br /> <br />4.6 Water Utilization <br /> <br />Many of the early irrigation rights in the project area have been <br /> <br /> <br />incorporated into three main ditch companies. The Farmers Water Development <br /> <br /> <br />Company is the largest of the three and operates the Naturita Canal, Gurley <br /> <br />-16- <br />