Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1925 <br /> <br />At individual stations, the tecord length for specific-conductance data was typically shorter than that for dis- <br /> <br />charge. Therefore, the discharge record length for individual stations was shortened to match the specific-conduc- <br /> <br />tance record for that station. This matching of record lengths facilitated tbe direct comparison of discharge and <br /> <br />specific-conductance trends at individual stations. Record lengths differed between stations (table 1), therefore, <br /> <br />trend results were not quantitatively compared between stations. At most stations, tbe effects of tributary discharge <br /> <br />and specific conductance were not considered in the trend analysis, because of a lack of tributary data. The excep- <br /> <br />tion was Fountain Creek. which is tributary to the Arkansas River near Pueblo, and for wbich there exists long- <br /> <br />term discharge and specific-conductance data. <br /> <br />Table 1 near here. <br /> <br />Discharge and specific-conductance data from tbe three gaging stations located between Pueblo Reservoir <br /> <br />and John Martin Reservoir were evaluated for trends tbat might have occurred after tbe construction of Pueblo Res- <br /> <br />ervoir in 1975. Data from the two stations located downstream from John Martin Reservoir were evaluated for <br /> <br />trends that might bave occurred following the implementation of the 1980 John Manin Reservoir Operating Plan <br /> <br />(Arkansas River Compact Administration, 1980). Likewise, the data collected at tbe upper-basin station 07096000 <br /> <br />were evaluated for trends that might have occurred after 1975, because tbis station was used in this study to eval- <br /> <br />uate trends in the quantity and quality of inflow into Pueblo Reservoir and the lower basin. <br /> <br />PREUMINARV REPORT. <br />. f"""-o~~ ,.-. ,""-.' <br />,..... ~~ ~r::f".T;-O ~.... .- <br />. ~,. -.... <br /> <br />6'" <br />