Laserfiche WebLink
<br />as the ,1949-1973 period, but the explanation for this <br /> <br />difference in slope appears ,to be the definition of usable <br /> <br />state line flows, the reduction in return flows due to <br /> <br />reduced diversions in Water District 67 during the period <br /> <br />1974-1979, and the 1980 Operating Plan for John Martin <br /> <br />Reservoir. However, usable state line flows for the period <br /> <br />1980-1985 should average 121,300 acre feet per year since it <br />appears certain that the maximum usable state line flow will <br /> <br />occur in 1985. This average is equal to the average for the <br />period 1949-1973. Thus, usable state line flows are equal to <br /> <br />the pre-drought cond~tions while a better management program <br />is in place allowing more timely deliveries of water." <br />Kansas believes that declines evident during the 1970s <br />resulted in part from depletions caused by water users in <br /> <br />Colorado. It is not valid to compare average state line <br />flows for a period of above average water supply (the 1980s) <br /> <br />to the long term average flows to determine whether 'normal' <br /> <br /> <br />.\ ::::::::n:,::v:h:e::a::::::d~,~: :::en::t::::d'::-:<:~':::' <br /> <br />\ conditions as Colorado contends. Colorado acknowledges that <br />the 1980-1984 slope is not equal to the 'slope of 1949-1973. <br />"'The argument that the definition of usable stateline flows <br />I <br />: lis a cause for the remaining difference in slope is not <br />, j'lvalid because the same definition was used in deriving the <br />I <br />i <br />\1949-1973 record. To date, the impact that the 1980 Storage <br />Resolution has had on the relationship of state line flow to <br />upstream flows has not been determined. Colorado has <br /> <br />omitted any mention of the potential impact of alluvial well <br /> <br />-20- <br /> <br />~ <br />