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 />002567 <br /> <br />34 <br /> <br />FT. LYON - This run included all of the Fort Lyon Canal. <br />The efficiency factor used was 26.5 percent. <br /> <br />LIMESTONE - This run simulated the Limestone-Graveyard <br />Creek portion of the Fort Lyon Canal system. The <br />efficiency factor used was 12.9 percent. <br /> <br />KEESE - This run included the Keese Canal only. The <br />efficiency factor used was 34.4 percent. <br /> <br />CLAY CREEK - This run included the Fort Bent, Lamar, <br />Manvel, and the XY and Graham Canals. The following <br />efficiency factors were used: <br /> <br />Fort Bent <br />Lamar <br />Manvel <br />XY and Graham <br /> <br />33.3 percent <br />0.6 percent <br />17.2 percent <br />31.2 percent <br /> <br />HORSE CREEK - This run included the Amity and Buffalo <br />Canals. The efficiency factors were: Amity - 32.9 <br />percentj and Buffalo - 39.8 percent. <br /> <br />ALL SYSTEMS - This run include all of the canals <br />described above. The same efficiency factors were used <br />as shown in the individual runs. <br /> <br />The results of each of these runs are shown in Table 9 and <br />Figures 10 through 12. No significant differences in either <br />flows or salt loading were found in any alternative runs <br />made. <br /> <br />The data from the river model indicated that: <br /> <br />(1) changes in irrigation management will have little <br />effect on the riverj or <br /> <br />(2) The model does not reflect the total effects of <br />irrigation projects. <br />