Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />002537 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />B. Stateline Flows. <br /> <br />The flow of the Arkansas River at the Colorado-Kansas <br />Stateline is well gaged, and the states do not dispute these <br />measured amounts. Colo. Exh. 886. However, the gage measurements <br /> <br />reflect total flows, including flood flows. Occasionally there are <br />brief but high-intensity thunderstorms that produce large volumes <br />of water which are not usable, but which nonetheless can signifi- <br /> <br />cantly influence any simple arithmetical average. Moreover, the <br />controlling provision in the Arkansas River Compact requires that <br />upstream development shall not materially deplete the "usable <br />quantity or availability" of water for use in Colorado or Kansas. <br /> <br />Article IV-D. <br /> <br />Thus Kansas' rights must ultimately be judged in <br /> <br />terms of usable flows, which were a major issue during the trial. <br />However, for the purpose here of a general view of river supplies, <br />unadjusted gage figures are used. <br /> <br />For the 1950-85 period, Stateline flows averaged 144,051 <br /> <br />acre-feet per year. <br /> <br />Colo. Exh. 4*, Table 5.8; Colo. Exh. 730. <br /> <br />Colorado acknowledges that the Stateline flows have declined.lil <br /> <br />During the dry decade of the 1970s, flows averaged only 72,203 <br /> <br />ll/ <br /> <br />See the testimony of one of Colorado's chief experts at RT <br />Vol. 114 at 115-16; also RT Vol. 115 at 73-76. Mr. Helton <br />testified that the decline since 1950 was due to a combination <br />of causes: a decrease in tributary inflow, an increase in <br />consumptive use by phreatophytes, and "partly because of post- <br />Compact well pumpage." RT Vol. 114 at 116. He agreed there <br />was a "trend of increase in depletions to state line flows." <br />RT Vol. 133 at 57-58. <br /> <br />Al1366n <br /> <br />-57- <br />