Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br /> <br />Thus, the canal could divert only 87.8 ft3/s. <br />been charged against reservoir releases to the <br />that time. <br /> <br />This l2-percent loss has <br />Colorado Canal since <br /> <br />(,e <br /> <br />The problem of transportation loss to the Colorado Canal was again <br />studied by Lacey (1941), During the course of his investigations, ev- <br />ery reasonable control over the river and the diversions was exercised. <br />After studying in elaborate detail each of the seven reservoir releases <br />made in 1939-40, Lacey concludes: <br /> <br />"In my opinion, exact determinations as to loss in transit <br />to the reservoir head in progression are impossible because of <br />the many influencing factors encountered which are beyond con- <br />trol. There are too many variables present in the situation, <br />which tend to obscure the graphic record and make objective <br />conclusions difficult." <br /> <br />In the final analysis, Lacey could not justify changing the l2-percent <br />loss rate, <br /> <br />Lacey (1941) also noted travel time during his studies, but because <br />the seven reservoir releases were all made during periods with similar <br />antecedent river conditions, the results indicated similar travel times, <br />As a result, these determinations were not valid for different anteced- <br />ent flow conditions. <br /> <br />I' <br /> <br />Recently, Wright Water Engineers (1970) did a preliminary study of <br />travel time and transit losses along the Arkansas River. Three categor- <br />ies of losses were studied: evaporation, bank storage, and "unauthorized <br />diversions." The magnitude of these losses varied with the amount of <br />the release and the natural river flow at Canon City. For typical res- <br />ervoir releases, the losses as defined from their report are somewhat <br />less than the l2-percent rate. Time of travel is also given in the <br />report for releases from Twin Lakes, Turquoise Lake, and Clear Creek <br />Reservoirs to several locations downstream, including the Colorado Canal <br />headgate. The flow at Canon City and the amount of the reservoir re- <br />lease were used in determining travel time. <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />HydroloRic SettinR of the Upper Arkansas River <br /> <br />The upper Arkansas River is that portion of the Arkansas River that <br />extends from the Continental Divide north of Leadville (elevation, <br />10,200 feet) downstream to the vicinity of Pueblo (elevation, 4,670 <br />feet), a distance of about 170 river miles (fig. 1). Above Canon City, <br />the river typically consists of pools and rapids. Although the river <br />primarily flows through hardrock canyons in this reach, it also trav- <br />erses a total of about 37 miles of alluvial deposits north of Salida, <br />near Buena Vista, and south of Leadville. Land in these areas is widely <br />used to grow hay, with flood-type irrigation commonly practiced. Below <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />. <br />