Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />r # .,~ <br />.z ~j. ~.t ",1 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />BASALT PROJECT <br /> <br />~IATER SUPPLY <br /> <br />of the estimated irrigation diversion requirement per irrigable acre and <br />the monthly distribution of the requirement are summarized in the follow- <br />ing tables. <br /> <br />n <br /> <br />Derivation of irrigation di.version requirement <br />(Unit--a.:;re-feet Rer acre) <br />Cattle Creek <br /> <br />Sopris <br />area <br /> <br />Carbondale <br />area <br />1.77 <br />.33 <br /> <br />5/9 - 5/21 <br />5/22 - 9/26 <br />9/27 - 1016 <br /> <br />distribution of diversion requirement <br />(Unit--a.cre-feet 'Jer a,cre) <br />Cattle Creek Sopris <br />area area <br />0.28 0.27 <br />.95 .83 <br />1.02 .88 <br />.83 .73 <br />.53 .46 <br />.02 .02 <br />3.63 3.19 <br /> <br />arAa <br />1;73 <br />.33 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Growing season consurnptive used! <br />Less effective precipitation <br />Consumptive use requirement <br />from irrigation <br />Per productive acre~1 <br />Per irrigable acre <br />Farm application loss <br />Conveyance losses in ditches <br />and laterals <br />Irrigation diversion requirement <br />per irrigable acre <br />II Growing season: <br />- Pre-frost-free period <br />Frost-free period <br />Post-frost-free period <br />Total average growing season <br />2/ Productive acreage Was considered to be 94 <br />irrigable acreage. <br /> <br />l.n <br />.33 <br /> <br />1.44 <br />1.35 <br />1.36 <br /> <br />.48 <br /> <br />1.44 <br />1.35 <br />1. 77 <br /> <br />.58 <br /> <br />1.40 <br />1.32 <br />1.77 <br /> <br />.54 <br /> <br />3.63 <br /> <br />Monthly <br /> <br />Month <br />May <br />June <br />July <br />August <br />September <br />October <br />Tot al <br /> <br />Usable Return Flow <br /> <br />3.19 <br /> <br />3.70 <br /> <br />percent <br /> <br />13 days <br />128 days <br />10 days <br />151 days <br />of the <br /> <br />Carbondale <br />area <br />0.31 <br />.95 <br />1.03 <br />.85 <br />.54 <br />.02 <br />3.70 <br /> <br />Consideration of return flO1Q from the three project areas led to the <br />conclusion that usable return flow would be availa:ble only in the Cattle <br />Creele area. The slopes and locations of the Sopris and Carbondale areas <br />and the lack of inflow diversion data. led to the assumption that return <br />flow from these areas would be minor and would probably reappear at points <br />. too low for rediversion to project lands. <br /> <br />