Laserfiche WebLink
<br />0009S0 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Repurt of the Regi onal Director <br /> <br />water through the Ft. Laramie Canal to the Gering & Ft. Laramie <br />IErigation District at the state line (Mile 85.4), where it is <br />measured by a Parshall flume; and for delivering water to the Lingle <br />Powerplant. Water is also diverted from the Ft. Larwe Canal within <br />the Goshen District to delivery points on several laterals crossing <br />the state line, one of which is the Horse Creek Lateral. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />18. The need for a regulatory offstream reservoir some place <br />along the Ft. Laramie Canal was recob~ized in the original plan of <br />development. The assumed velocity in the canal is 2., feet per <br />second, or 1.7 miles per hour. That rate of flow imposes a delivery <br />control problem on the Ft. Laramie Canal because of its 130-mile <br />length. Five days are normally required for water to flow from the <br />Whalen Diversion Dam to the lower end of the project. Water that has <br />been diverted to meet a specific demand now must be wasted back to <br />the river should the need cease before the water reaches the point of <br />delivery. Likewise when a demand cannot be anticipated in advance, <br />as the occurrence of a sudden hot spell, water cannot now be delivered <br />to the critical area in tine to be of maxillIUlll benefit, This time lag <br />in the control of water has been detrimental to the most economical <br />use of water and to the most efficient delivery of water. Considera- <br />tion has been given to enlarging the Ft. Laramie Canal but this was <br />deemed uneconomical because it would necessitate expensive enlarge- <br />ment of the tunnels at HIe 4.7 and ~.iile 13 (approximate). Enlarge- <br />ment of the canal would only partially solve the problem because <br />the waste of water to the river probably would be increased and the <br />problem of well regulated delivery would still exist. <br /> <br />19. A reservoir site on Horse Creek, in \~oming, was included <br />in the original project plan by the Bureau of Reclamation as shown <br />on Exhibit 1, "General Map". Geologic investigations at several <br />Horse Creek damsites disclosed the probability of excessive over- <br />burden of gravel, hence the sites were deemed to be not feasible. <br /> <br />20. As an alternative, investigations were made of a reservoir <br />site on Dry Creek Drain, in Nebraska. flater studies indicate that <br />the combined inflow to the potential reservoir from natural runoff <br />of the 21.6 square mile drainage area of Dry Creek and from unavoid- <br />able wastes of the Ft. Laramie Canal and Horse Creek Lateral would have <br />averaged 8,400 acre-feet annually during the peried 1933-1946. The <br />reservoir wo'lld not be used for storage purposes otrnr than to <br />impound water for release to the Horse Creek Lateral ~stem upon <br />demand. The reservoir co'lld also be filled in the spring wi th s urpluB <br />flood waters from the NQrth Platte River which the Guernsey Reservoir <br />cannot store, by diversion to the Ft. Laramie Canal and release to <br />the proposed reservoir through the wasteway at I.~ile 88.3. The Horse <br />Creek Lateral, below the Dry Creek diversion, serves about 8,700 acres <br />of irrigable land. With the potential reservoir in operation deliv- <br />eries could be made to the Horse Creek Lateral system without <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />(Rev.) <br />