|
<br />\){)1949
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Surface-Water Conveyances
<br />
<br />There are two principal surface-water conveyances in the study area (fig, 1); the Fort Lyon Canal
<br />
<br />and the Arkansas River. Records of discharge for the Arkansas River at La Junta, a streamflow-gaging
<br />
<br />station that is located at La Junta and is downstream from the diversion at the headgate for the Fort
<br />
<br />Lyon Canal, are stored in a USGS data base known as the Automated Data Processing System
<br />
<br />(ADAPS). Records of discharge for the Fort Lyon Canal, that are from the gaging)l(!ltion located down-
<br />/ <<
<br />( /-" "" ~',-
<br />stream from the canal headgate were obtained from the Colorado Division ofo/~r'R~)our~~!l>',
<br />"" 'If " < ,'_,-"~ >
<br />
<br />There are two facts about the Fort Lyon Canal that need to be COn~i~r~~;$irS~(th~);~:~
<br />",q, \, \/ /,C\'>../' ,'/"<." \ \,__ j l
<br />/ ~, '\ t \, ""\'. --~-," J
<br />unlined; that is the bottom and banks consist of native materials, .t~~:,s~~~t?~~~~yeyance losses
<br />
<br />/':' --'~:' '- {""- \ '._ /-"'~ i
<br />(in this sense the Fort Lyon Canal provides recharge to the I~~l(!:a~uYet). {1\i\~i-!l~9:t6 1990 study Dash
<br />'\, \0' j/ J"-~,__ \ \. -'v/
<br />(1995) estimated that losses could be as high as abo~~~~\acre-fee(p~~,dl1Y:~~ mile.
<br />-'-.-. - ", " { ,; j' / -
<br />Second, ,the Fort Lyon Canal gaging stati9n;j;;)p~;ieJ'~oJ~~~~~riif;om two structures that are
<br />
<br />. sometimes used to divert water from the car\;;\;r:,~~:~I1an~';:~~~~;~s related to suspended sediment
<br />'\ ,", ?' J-------,~ 'J
<br />/, \ \/,/r'--J f /~'--'\ '\
<br />"-~ "" - \, "\ '-
<br />loads in the canal; as a result, the gaging.s'tatlQ~i:Iq~not.!:~Co~d water diverted through these structures.
<br />('>;;", -'';;:__~__~_~/ /J <, ""_"__~ww_J
<br />
<br />Also, beginning 1975, about the~~,<!l;;::q"fthe P~;;;;lI),eing studied, Pueblo Reservoir began to operate
<br />, /""~-~~ \~-<\~>/ //'> -,j
<br />
<br />(Abbot, 1985). The operati'o~:s..~ll\t.~;rti~e~~,the study described in this report are the distribution of
<br /><: "\" "j". -~~'~ /' ,/~_/ /'\ "\./
<br />water stored in the ~es~i,yQlr.f9r1Jsl\ ~tt,'l. I~tej time (winter water) and the distribution of water available
<br /><. <;/ /F ,;:",,' ,/'- ~//<-\__ .., ,,- /
<br />from transmo\ltiia;.ft'di~~;SiOlf~t~j~~ts:Cproject water).
<br />~\,\,<.i n,,',':>"'//,n,^ ""~'>\'<\>//
<br />The <;Ii$~hltrge r~cprd"fo~l.he Fort Lyon Canal is shown in figure 5. The annual total hydrograph
<br />'" ',/ ,,-' J<>,,< ",,' }
<br />, ,~ "", -'
<br />indicates that'lh~Q~~1he/~anaI increased beginning in 1977. The tendency for increasing flow, punc-
<br />;- ,), "'",,:--'
<br />tuated by a lqw tellr1in 1981, continued through 1985, during which the highest flow for the period of
<br />
<br />record occurred. After 1985, flow began to decrease and generally continued to decrease through 1989.
<br />
<br />After 1989, flow in the canal began to increase at, compared to the increases in the 1980's, a moderate
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />rate. These moderate increases are probably due to full implementation of Pueblo Reservoir operations
<br />
<br />which include the release, later in the year, of water stored in the reservoir and the distribution of trans-
<br />
<br />11
<br />
|