Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. major floods or excessive precipitation and <br />runoff. <br /> <br />Additional analysis should be performed to determine if <br /> <br /> <br />major flood events have dIstorted the data and resulted in <br /> <br />any inappropriate conclusions from the mass diagram analy- <br /> <br />ses. <br /> <br />Conclusion <br /> <br />With this discussion in mind, as well as a general <br /> <br />familiarity with the relevant engineering studies'and the <br /> <br />history of water use on the Arkansas River, Kansas reaches <br /> <br />the following conclusions from the single and double mass <br />analyses performed by the Investigation Committee: <br /> <br />1. Postcompact development on the Arkansas River ih <br /> <br />Colorado has occurred with significant depletive effects. <br /> <br />Foremost among these developments has been the development <br /> <br />of alluvial wells during the 1950s and early 1960s. Other <br /> <br />water resource development has included construction of <br /> <br />Trinidad Reservoir, Pueblo Reservoir, implementation of the <br /> <br />winter Water Storage Program, and increased return flows <br /> <br />. <br />from transmountain diversions into the Arkansas River Basin. <br /> <br />It is reasonable to assume that all of these factors have <br /> <br />altered the flows of the Arkansas River and some may be <br /> <br />causing depletions at the stateline. Previous studies, <br /> <br />including those performed by Colorado itself, support <br /> <br />Kansas' position that postcompact development of wells in <br /> <br />Colorado has depleted state line flows. <br />2. The mass diagram analyses were undertaken by the <br />"Committee as a first step to determine if postcompact <br /> <br />-33- <br /> <br />jj~, '""" <br />