Laserfiche WebLink
<br />30G:i <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />increased storage which would have occurred had the Model Reser- <br />voir storage decree of 20,000 acre-feet been available at its <br />present location throughout the study period. An accretion <br />immediately below the project area comparing post project and <br />historic conditions amounted to an average of 200 acre-feet <br />annually for the 1.925-1.957 study period while a comparison of <br />post project and modified historic conditions showed an average <br />annual. accretion of 4,000 acre-feet for the 1925-1.957 study <br />period. Effects of project operation be1.ow the project area were <br />reduced by natursJ. channe1. 1.osses resulting in an average annusJ. <br />accretion to John Martin Reservoir inflow of 300 acre-feet for <br />the project-historic comparison and an average annusJ. accretion <br />of 3,000 acre-feet for the project-modified historic comparison. <br />A comparison of diversions and depJ.etions with and without <br />project operation within the project area is shown in tab1.e 2. <br />The modified historic diversions and depletions reflect historic <br />conditions increased by assuming the tu11. MOde1. storage decree of <br />20,000 acre-feet avai1.ab1.e at the present 1.ocation throughout the <br />study period. <br />Exhibit 3 graphicsJ.1.y il1.ustrates the estimated' project- <br />modified historic effect in comparil;lon to the inflow supp1.y at <br />John Martin Reservoir. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1.1. <br /> <br />