Laserfiche WebLink
<br />li <br /> <br />o <br />0) <br />0) <br />Coil <br /> <br />i. <br /> <br />I <br />I. <br /> <br />l <br />, <br />I <br />I <br />I ' <br />; <br />.' <br />i <br />j <br />, . <br />~ <br />~ <br />I <br />. <br />. <br />~ <br />~ <br />~ <br />" <br />, <br /> <br />!~ <br /> <br />< <br />t <br />~ <br />; <br />.' <br />~~ . <br /> <br />;.~ <br /> <br />"." <br />~~ <br />"3 <br />::: <br />.~~ <br /> <br />;.' <br />,.. <br /> <br />.;: <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />.;, <br /> <br />to permit the water users to repay the costs of the Piedmont <br />Bridge Reservoir allocated to irrigation ~ould extend consider- <br />ably beyond the useful life of the capacity allocated to irriga- <br />tion. <br /> <br />In the wa.ter supply studies it was assumed that a total of <br /> <br /> <br />64,000 acre-feet of storage would be available for irrigation <br /> <br /> <br />use when the project was first completedJ of which 54,000 acre- <br /> <br />feet would be in the Piedmont Reservoir and 10,000 acre-feet in <br /> <br />tile Model Reservoir. The irrigation storage was decreased each <br /> <br />year thereafter by the amount of silt which may be expected to be <br /> <br /> <br />deposited in the reservoir. This leaves a firm capacity of <br /> <br /> <br />27J500 acre-feet in the Piedmont Bridge Reservoir for flood con- <br /> <br />trol. This is the same value 8,S shown in the Corps of Engineers <br /> <br />re;Jort. Hater available for storage consisted of that passing <br /> <br />the Trinidad gaging station plus four cubic feet per second of <br /> <br />sewage return from the City, provided the water was not needed to <br /> <br />meet the ideal irrigation requirements. <br /> <br />Examination of the irpigated apea indicated that most of the <br /> <br />peturn flow would return to the Purgatoire River too far down- <br />stream for reuse in the area. To check this, past diversions of <br /> <br />the ditches were compared to the Trinidad flow, after being cor- <br />rected for non-divertible high flows. VTith a 3 l)ercent operation <br />loas, the comparison shows that inflow diverted by the ditches <br /> <br />from return [low, from sewageJ and from su.rface l'unoff below <br /> <br />Trinidad closely approximates the sewage contribution to the <br /> <br />ri vel' . <br /> <br />The ideal headgate requirement of 2.9 acre-feet per acre pel' <br /> <br />year for the project was determined from comparison with other <br /> <br />-llf- <br />