WSPC01583 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

oon907 i November4,1996 Page 2 · ADY_027 Green River (1879 acres) Modeling the Green River in detail is not an objective, however we want to model consumptive use wilhin the Slate of Colorado, lherefore aggregate The larger number of acres in the aggregations listed above allowed for higher spatial resolution on the river above Stagecoach Reservoir. This is the area lhat has been administered historically. Two parcels of land included in the Phase 3 irrigated land database are localed in the Colorado Basin, in lhe Egeria Creek basin. The structure number assigned to these parcels in the database is 580887. However, the lands appear in the Colorado Basin dalabase wilh a different structure assignment. Afler consulting with lhe State it was decided that these two parcels should be excluded from the Phase 3 Yampa model. Three parcels of land included in the Phase 3 irrigaled land database are localed wholly within Wyoming. These were excluded from the aggregalions. One parcel lies in bolh Slales and was left in the model because lhe larger part is in Colorado. Three parcels identified as Phase 3 lands in lhe spalial dalabase had already been included in the Phase 2 model. The lhree parcels compose all irrigated land under two structures. The parcels were excluded from lhe aggregations. This duplication turned up when watright was executed. To verify that no structures appeared in two aggregation groups, the list of struclures represented by the aggregations was sorted in an Excel spreadsheet. A 0/] flag was set for each, reflecting whether lhe structure id was the same (I) as lhe previous structure or not (0). The sum of lhe column of flags was zero. Therefore, the Stale did not need to resolve any duplicate slruclure id's. The acreage column in the Excel spreadsheet was summed to verify thai total acreage in the aggregation lisl malched tOlal acreage from lhe Phase 3 irrigated lands Arcview tables. This verified lhal no parcels had been somehow dropped. Results Exhibit 1 is a map of the aggregalion boundaries, showing Phase 2 and Phase 3 lands and baseflow nodes as well. Exhibit 2 is a tabulation of the aggregations, the number of parcels in each, and the tolal irrigated land for each grouping. Exhibit 3 lists the diversion structures represented by each node. Aggregation nodes were given the id "ADY_xxx", for Aggregated Diversion Yampa. The value xxx reflects stream order, beginning with ADY _00 I on the Upper Bear River. Names of downstream gages were used for the node name where appropriate. These names and id's are consistent with the convention set in the While River. There was no need for any Phase 3 lands to be modeled explicitly. In all cases, the nodes representing the aggregated lands will be placed in the model at the most downslream posilion within the aggregated area.