Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Report of the Regional Director <br /> <br />f" ........ " <br />"U;J'~ <br /> <br />at 50 percent more than the initial supply, based upon suc- <br />cessive re-uses of the water at the rate of 40 percent return <br />flow from each application. The next table sh01i'S the source <br />of water to be made available far the Arkansas Valley, recon- <br />structed as annual averages far the 1911-1944 period of study. <br /> <br />(Thousands of acre-feet) <br /> <br />Source Gross Losses Net HeOOga te <br /> supply <br />Fryingpan diversion 69.2 15.5 53.7 -- <br />Arksnsas River floods 50.0 32.0 18.0 -- <br />Total project weter 119.2 47.5 71.7 -- <br />Less m\illicipel wa tar 15.0 -- 15.0 -- <br /> - <br />Project irrigation supply , 104.2 47.5 56.7 85.1 <br />~unicipal return flaw-- <br />Arkansas Valley 7.0 2.5 4.5 6.7 <br />Addi tional Tlrin Lakes <br />diversion 14.9 2.4 12.5 18.8 <br />Converted winter flaw 93.0 19.0 74.0 74.0 <br />Total valley irrigation <br />supply 219.1 71.4 147.7 184.6 <br />Tributary municipal return <br />flow - -- 3.5 5.2 <br />'Iotal usable irrigation supply -- -- 151.2 189.8 <br /> - <br /> <br />FINANCES AND PROJECT OPERATION <br /> <br />66. B~sed upon preliminary designs, and upon prices <br />prevailing in October 1949, the estimated constl".1ction cost <br />of the project is $147,440,000. About 25 percent of that <br /> <br />R <br /> <br />22 <br /> <br />........ <br />