Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />002565 <br /> <br />32 <br /> <br />B. summary of River Model Runs <br /> <br />The USGS model was run using the data files supplied by the <br />USGS for the 1975-85 period of record. The results of this <br />run was considered the base condition from which all other <br />runs were compared with. The run was titled CALIBRATION. <br /> <br />Monthly flows, mean concentration, and salt loading were <br />displayed for the following gauge stations in the Arkansas <br />River. See Figure 9 for gage locations. <br /> <br />PUBL <br />CAT <br />ANMS <br />JMR <br />LAMR <br />COOL <br /> <br />outlet of the Pueblo Reservoir <br />at the Catlin Dam <br />near Las Animas <br />outlet of John Martin Reservoir <br />near Lamar <br />at the Colorado-Kansas state line <br /> <br />Monthly statistics were also obtained for the following <br />canal systems: Bessemer, Colorado, Rocky Ford Highline, <br />Oxford Farmers, Otero, catlin, Rocky Ford, Holbrook, Fort <br />Lyon, Las Animas consolidated, Keese, Fort Bent, Amity, <br />Lamar, Manvel, X-Y and Graham, and Buffalo. The data <br />included average monthly values of: water needed, direct <br />diversion, groundwater pumpage, reservoir releases, total <br />water applied, precipitation, water consumed, concentration, <br />canal leakage, tail water, and deep percolation. The <br />monthly values were also totaled to display a yearly value. <br /> <br />Future conditions runs were made by modifying the water <br />users input data file using the subroutine developed by the <br />USGS. The percent change of water consumed determined using <br />the system monthly water budget analyses program was entered <br />into the USGS model. The model was then run with the new <br />input data. <br /> <br />The fOllowing future condition runs were made: <br /> <br />PATTERSON - This run included the Rocky Ford Highland, <br />Oxford Farmers, Otero, Catlin, and Rock Ford Canals. <br />The systems analyses indicated that only the Otero Canal <br />would have a change in water consumed. The factor used <br />for this canal was 24.5 percent. <br /> <br />HOLBROOK - This run included only the Holbrook Canal. A <br />factor of 41.3 percent was used to increase water <br />consumption. <br /> <br />BESSEMER - This run included only the Bessemer Canal. A <br />factor of 26.1 percent was used. <br />