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 <br /> <br />I- <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 />Methods used to estimate water supplies for the Cone Reservoir Enlargement <br /> <br /> <br />indicate that additional water is available to the project using original San <br /> <br /> <br />Miguel Project water decrees. An average of approximately 1000 additional <br /> <br /> <br />acre-feet per year is available to the Cone Reservoir collection ditches. A <br /> <br /> <br />maximum of 1,836 acre-feet could have been collected in the wettest year <br /> <br /> <br />studied (1983) with practically none (141 acre-feet) available in an extremely <br /> <br /> <br />dry year (1977). An operation study to determine the project water supply has <br /> <br /> <br />been included in Appendix C. This supply alof'e is not ~ufficient to fully <br /> <br /> <br />utilize a 4,000 acre-foot enlargement. <br /> <br />In addition to enhanced collected within the Cone system, members of the <br /> <br /> <br />San Miguel Water Conservancy District Board assert that surplus water can be <br /> <br /> <br />diverted from the Gurley Ditch to the Cone Reservoir. A 10-year simulation of <br /> <br /> <br />historic Gurley Reservoir operation suggests that surplus water has been <br /> <br /> <br />available in 5 years (1974 and 1980-1983). The most recent years produced a <br /> <br /> <br />surplus of several thousand acre-feet. No record exists to confirm how much of <br /> <br /> <br />this surplus was diverted to the Cone Reservoir. With these surplus diversions <br /> <br /> <br />from the Gurley Ditch, our simulation indicates that a 4,000 acre-foot <br /> <br /> <br />enlargement would be filled in 4 of the 10 years. A more reliabl. water <br /> <br /> <br />supply, one defined by an agreement perhaps, could make better use of the <br /> <br /> <br />proposed storage enlargement and provide benefits to a greater portion of the <br /> <br /> <br />community. <br /> <br />Using methods described in Section 4.3 above, a 10-year yield study for <br /> <br /> <br />the Gurley collection system was performed using District-held San Miguel <br /> <br /> <br />Project water rights. These rights could yield an average of 7,764 acre-feet <br /> <br /> <br />per year. A low of 714 acre-feet would have been obtained in 1977 with over <br /> <br /> <br />15,000 acre-feet available in the largest runoff year, 1983. Physical <br /> <br /> <br />limitations on the diversion structures and conveyance canals could limit <br /> <br /> <br />actual yield. A diurnal fluctuation in flow is usually observed at diversion <br /> <br /> <br />points during runoff season. The Naturita Canal (Gurley Reservoir feeder <br /> <br /> <br />canal) diverts at numerous tributaries in the Beaver Creek drainage. The <br /> <br /> <br />combined flow of all tributaries can exceed the capacity of the ditch at times. <br /> <br /> <br />A survey of historic daily records show that the maximum momentary peaks at <br /> <br /> <br />each diversion point could exceed the 400 cfs Naturita Canal by about 200 cfs <br /> <br />-18- <br />