Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.:;;.';"'~~'lI.' <br />I,..;'Y~ .- <br />">.' <br />.~ <br /> <br />Return Flow <br /> <br />f' <br /> <br />Based on a comparison of climatic concitions along Florida <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />River with those on the Boise and Shoshone Projects, where the Bureau <br /> <br />of Reclamation h~s secured experimental data, it appears that an an- <br /> <br />nual consumptive use of 2.25 acre-feet per 'lcre would be QPplicable <br /> <br />to the Floridc. area (of which 2.0 feet occurs in the months of April <br /> <br /> <br />to October, inclusive). This includes ell the losses incident::.l to <br /> <br />irrigation such us strerun chunnel (Cnd ditch evaporation, growth of <br /> <br />willows, weeds, etc. A div8rsion of 3.15 acre-feet per acre together <br /> <br />;lith average annual precipitation of 12 inches in the lower years, and <br /> <br />a consumptive use of 2.25 acre-feet per acre, indicates an annual re- <br /> <br />f~ <br />'~:i.>" <br /> <br />turn flow of 1.90 acre-feet per acre. <br /> <br />While return flow is continuous, the greatest quantity flows <br /> <br />during the irrigation seaSon, and is estimated at 65% of the yearly <br /> <br />total, or 1.25 acre-feet per acre. On Florida Mesa much of the re- <br /> <br />turn flow appears in the gulches leading to the south and would be <br /> <br />lost, even during the irrigation season. It i~ estimated that only <br /> <br />60% of the seasonal total can be utilililed, amounting to .75 acre-foot <br /> <br />per acre, <br /> <br />Diversion Demand <br /> <br />For convenience in operation the 1,400 acres now receiving <br /> <br />o.deljuate water /ll11Y be combined vvith the 20,000 Q.cres requiring supple- <br /> <br />IIwntal water and a single dr"ft applied to the) runoff of Florida River <br /> <br />at the reservoir on the basis of a diversion of 3,15 acre-feet and n <br /> <br />usable return flow of 0.75 acre-foot per acre, as follows: <br /> <br />36 <br />