Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" <br /> <br />9 <br /> <br />For the months of July and August the diminishing trend has two <br />phases. The first detectable change began around 1951, and a second one <br />ten years later in 1961. This may have been caused by the intensified <br />use of 9roundwater from the alluvium of the river valley starting in the <br />early 1950's. This trend has reversed durin9 recent years in September <br />and October, probably reflecting the affect of return flows from Colorado- <br />Big Thompson water applied late in the irrigation season + return flows <br />from pumped water. <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />2. The linear correlation coefficient of the water year data shows <br />a fairly close relationship of the variables. This index is also fairly <br />high for months during the irrigation, but tends to be lower during the <br />non-irrigation season--particularly January. <br /> <br />Tabulated below are the least square regression line equations by <br />months and for the water year along with the linear correlation coef- <br />ficients, "r.lI <br /> <br />Month <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />January <br />February <br />March <br />April <br />May <br />June <br />July <br />August <br />September <br />October <br />November <br />December <br />Water Year <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />Iguation .. <br /> <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br />Return <br /> <br />flow = 0.41 <br />flow = 0.60 <br />flow = 0.83 <br />flow = 0.74 <br />flow = 0.63 <br />flow = 0.43 <br />flow = 0.72 <br />flow = 0.76 <br />flow = 0.52 <br />flow = 0.61 <br />flow = 0.81 <br />flow = 0.68 <br />flow = 0.66 <br /> <br />10,510 <br />5,680' <br />280 <br />660 <br />7,300 <br />29,980 <br />14,050 <br />14,790 <br />22,610 <br />13,090 <br />900 <br />3,420 <br />101,553 <br /> <br />In flow + <br />Inflow + <br />Inflow <br />Inflow + <br />In flow + <br />Inflow + <br />Inflow + <br />Inflow + <br />In flow + <br />In flow + <br />Inflow - <br />In flow + <br />Inflow + <br /> <br />Comparison of Inflows and Total Diversions <br /> <br />Correlation <br />Coefficient <br /> <br />0.68 <br />0.86 <br />0.95 <br />0.96 <br />0.87 <br />0.95 <br />0.96 <br />0.92 <br />0.90 <br />0.86 <br />0.91 <br />0.87 <br />0.92 <br /> <br />The same inflow variables were used in these analyses as defined in <br />the previous section. The "total diversions. variable consists of the <br />total water diverted by each ditch having its headgate between the <br />Henderson and Kersey gages regardless of water type. <br /> <br />The time span of the analyses were 1956 through 1966. However, <br />because of l.ack of winter diversions, only months belonging to the irri- <br />gation ~ason (April through October) have been used and similarly the <br />total yearly figure is represented by the seasonal sum. <br /> <br />The relatedness of diversions to existing inflows is only moderate <br />to poor. Early and late irrigation diversions are inversely proportional <br />to the inflows and only in July and August is there a dir~ct or positive <br />relationship. This indicates a generally stable irrigation pattern in <br />the early and late season, with a direct dependence on the amount of in- <br />flows in July and August. <br /> <br />" <br />