Laserfiche WebLink
<br />V'..:- .:.r <br /> <br />.(; . <br /> <br />.,>~ <br /> <br />~-'\:::~>Lt~):~.:.:;;:.: ;.' <br />..' :.\:_~.::./.;.. <br />:;\/.~ . <br />:...: . <br />., <br />, . <br /> <br />.' ..~>.' r, ~:-. <br />.'., "'.' <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />001924 <br /> <br />-6- <br /> <br />an average, made up of quantities whioh in some months and years are in excess <br />of assumed completed storage oapacity of the irrigation pool. While such ex- <br />oess volumes may be controlled, by storage in the flood pool, to prevent or <br />reduoe damages from floods originating upstream to lands and property along <br />the river channel downstroam, they cannot be impounded or stored in the irri- <br />gation pool, nor be regulated or conserved therein for irrigation purposes. <br />Are suoh exoess streamflows properly included in quanti ties termed "available <br />for storage?" Colorado notes that. in later oalculations by Kansas. flood <br />pool spills (as well as evaporation losses) have been deducted from the "water <br />available for store,ge" to arrive at so-called "amounts of usable water." Colo- <br />rado suggests that the caloulated 190,000 aore feet of so-called "water 'avail- <br />able for stcrage," if diminished by flcod pool spills. might be said to repre- <br />sent the streamflcrvm available for storage, and, if further diminished by <br />evaporation losses, to represent the water supplies available for release from <br />storage. provided that such quantities, in both instanoes, be reoognized as <br />being exolusive of "Gaddoa .flows heretofore used in Golorado," but inclusive, <br />of "Caddoa flows heretofore used in Kansas." both of which are available for <br />storage for purposes of regulation. <br /> <br />15. Though included by Kansas in the so-ce.lled "water available 'for <br />storage"' and "amounts of usalJle water," the Gaddoa flows heretofore used in <br />Kansas were ignored. or not estimated, in the dooument submitted for study <br />and disoussion. To arrive at the amounts of "new water" attributable to <br />Caddoa reservoir, operations, under the plan of operation assumed by Kansas. <br />the Caddoa flows heretofore used in Kansas must be o'aloulated or estimated. <br />Total Stateline flows, averaging 260,700 aore feet annually, were segreg~ted <br />by Kansas. 190,000 aore feet, or 73%. river flow passing Caddoa, and 70.700 <br />aore feet, or 27%, net aooretions below Lamar. Total uses of State line flews <br />in Kansas are indioated'by the differenoe between 260,700 aore feet passing <br />the'Stateline and 171,000 aore feet passing Garden Gity, - a differenoe of <br />89.700 acre feet. which inoludes ditch diversions, estimated at 84,900 aore <br />feet. as well as ohannel oonveyance losses and river water used from wells <br />by pumping. Segregating the uses in Kansas in the same proportions in whioh <br />State line flaws were segregated by l~nsas. the 89.700 aore feet of total use <br />would oonsist of 24.200 aore feet from net acoretions below Lamar. and 65.500 <br />aore feet from river flow passing Gaddoa. <br /> <br />t <br /> <br />16. To arrive at amotnIl; s of so-oalled "new water." the Gaddoa' flows here- <br />tofore used in Kansas must be deduoted from the so-oalled "amounts of usable <br />water." as follows I <br /> <br /> Extension of' Kansas Studies <br /> 1 and 2 __2-_ 4 <br /> --_.~- -_.- <br />"Amounts of Usable Water" 121,000 137.000 153,000 <br />Lsss "Caddoa Flows heretofore <br />used in Kansas" 65,500 65.500 --0! 500 <br />Estimated amounts of So-called <br />"New Water" 55,500 71.500 87,500 <br /> <br />17. The showings of Studies 3 and 4, as compared with Study 2. as sum- <br />marized by Kansas, are to the effect that greater "demands on the reservoir." <br />