My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP03730
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
WSP03730
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:51:49 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:56:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8273.100
Description
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control - Federal Agencies - Bureau of Reclamation
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
1/1/1983
Author
BOR
Title
Grand Valley Salt Pickup Calculations - draft report
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
106
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />-{"~f1~ <br /> <br />CHAPTER II <br /> <br />....... <br />Ut <br /><:Jl <br /> <br />-.:I <br /> <br />GRAND VALLEY RIVER BUDGET <br /> <br />Nevertheless, note that a 10 percent error in the mean annual flow one way at <br /> <br />the Cameo gage, and the other way at the State Line gage, would cause an <br /> <br />annual unaccounted flow of 685,000 acre-feet, which is an order of magnitude <br /> <br />larger than that in the State Line budget. <br /> <br />Another factor that could cause significant unaccounted flow is <br /> <br />ground water storage. The variation in ground water storage from year to <br /> <br />year could result in significant unaccounted flow in the annual budgeting <br /> <br />process. For this reason, and because of the possibility of relatively large <br /> <br />streamfloW estimation errors, precise estimates of salt pickup for any given <br /> <br />year cannot be expected. The estimate of the average annual salt pickup, on <br /> <br />the other hand, should be accurate (see Discussion of Confidence in <br /> <br />:>/., Results). <br />Given the large variability in annual unaccounted flow, and again the <br /> <br />possibility of relatively large streamflow estimation errors, the. source of <br /> <br />the relatively small positive tendency in unaccounted flow could not be <br /> <br />identified. It could result. in part .from unidentified ground water losses; <br /> <br />an underestimation of consumptive use; or an overestimation of precipitation <br /> <br />ungaged inflows, or municipal imports. But, for the reasons noted above, <br /> <br />most of the positive tendency is probably caused by a slight systematic error <br /> <br />in streamflow measurement. If this is the case, or if there is some <br /> <br />unidentified ground water outflow, then the unaccounted flow has salt SBsoci- <br /> <br />ated with it, and therefore, a straight forward accounting process neglecting <br /> <br />the consiatently positive unaccounted flow (i.e., inflows exceeding outflows) <br /> <br />will underestimate the salt pickup. In other words, ignoring a consistently <br /> <br />'. ..' <br /> <br />positive unaccounted flow is the same as ignoring an outflow. Now, if the <br /> <br />~: .": ": ", <br />':." <br /> <br />II-ll <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.