Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />larger per,~entage of ground water will be derived from salvaged evapo- <br /> <br />transpirRtion as the period of project opec.1tion increases. For e>:amp1e. <br /> <br />at the enu of 10 years about 65 percent of ,he water salvaged was Irom <br /> <br />salvaged evapotranspiration and 35 percent was derived from storas, . <br /> <br />After 50 years of operation. 8/. perceno: was derived from evapotraru;pira- <br /> <br />cien and 14 perCent from storage. The salvage water from induced i.io <br /> <br />Grande seepage amounted to only about 2 percent of the total Amount: <br /> <br />salvaged during the 50 years of simulated project operation. <br /> <br />This analog a06lys1l< is thought to tend to overestimate water leve;. <br /> <br />decline and Rio Grande effects. because of its assumption of continuous <br /> <br />ground water withdrawal. no contribution by upper leakage from the <br /> <br />artesian a~uifer. and unrestricted hydrologic connection between the <br /> <br />unconfined aquifer and the Rio Grande. <br /> <br />Following completion of this analog study. the Colorado State Engineer <br /> <br />expressed concern that the Bureau's well layout would cause unrealistic <br /> <br />dravdowos in certain salvage areas. The GS then considered other <br /> <br />-pumping patterns in an effort to limit the dra~down. A simple analysis <br /> <br />was made by redistributing the ground vater withdravals. taking into <br /> <br />cor~1deration the trans~issivity patterns. Transmissivity is the rate <br /> <br />at which water is transmitted through a unit width of aquifer under a <br /> <br />hYdraulic .radient of unit. The analysis indicated that about 130 wella <br /> <br />could puep the proposed amo~nt of water vithout causing exceSsive draw- <br /> <br />dow-..a . <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />,.' ,~, 'h r' ',;l'\ <br />\.._ .\..i Ijl <br /> <br />