Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. /." <br /> <br />,j <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1O~~ <br />~ <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />Had the reservoir been in operation in 1933, it <br />would have taken care of the replacement and natural short- <br />age requirements for 1934 and would have refilled in 1935. <br />With regard to the 1954 season, the replacement and <br />natural shortages would have been amply provided for. <br />The check studies conducted by the Water Board show <br />that the average yield above diversion points will provide <br />the 69,200 acre-feet for the project plus.the amount neces- <br />sary to make the Busk-Ivanhoe diversion of some 5,000 acre- <br />feet. The low water years of 1934 and 1954 would have been <br />provided with an average flow by means of the reservoirs on <br />the Eastern Slope which would have stored the above average <br />yields of the previous two or three years. <br />Effect on Colorado River Flow at Lee Ferry <br />An analysis indicates that the historical flow of the <br />Colorado River in the period 1931-40, the most severe drought <br />period of record, would satisfy the Lower Basin obligation of <br />75,000,000 acre-feet and, in addition produce a total.of <br />26,500,000 acre-feet for the development of the Upper Basin. <br />Stated in another manner: There would be, even under those <br />extreme conditions, an annual average of 2,000,000 acre-feet <br />available during this period for Upper Basin development, and <br />this after taking out an amount sufficient for the present <br />