|
<br />!
<br />'REPORII' ON ~OLORADO RIVER STO'RAGiE P'ROcr.EICT
<br />
<br />7
<br />
<br />
<br />,
<br />NET FLOW DIFFERE:&CES BETWEEN GLEN CANYON AND HOOVER
<br />! '
<br />Table II compares, fllr the past 19 years of record, the flows at the
<br />Glen Canyon Dam site! (Colorado River at Lees Ferry), the changes
<br />in Lake Mead storag~,l and the flows of the Colorado River below
<br />Hoover Dam. In thisl19-year period, the indicated annual difi'erc
<br />ences vary from a loss <If 1,003,000 acre-feet to a gain of 524,000 acre-
<br />feet with an average ainualloss of about 113,000 acre"feet. Studies
<br />_ l'~esented ~y the Burea of Reclamation in: the report on the Colorado
<br />R,ver BaSIl?- (H. Doc. 4, 9, 80th 90n!5', 1st sess.) sho~ annual stream-
<br />flow depletIOns from pJesent ll"ngatlOn and mdustnal developments
<br />in this portion of the qolorado River Basin to the extent of 166,000
<br />acre:foet. These presep.t uses are reflected in the determination of
<br />pastann}IaI net losses. ;
<br />
<br />TABLE II.
<br />
<br />[In thousands of a,cre-feet]
<br />
<br /> ,
<br /> 1 Colorado Storage Colorado Net gains (+)
<br /> , Rivorat change River or losses (-)
<br />Year beginning Apr. 1-; Glen in Lake below Glen Canyon
<br /> 1 Canyon Mead Hoover Dam slte to
<br />. Damsltet Dam Hoover Dan,;t
<br /> i 15,620 +6,393 8.224
<br />lfil~~ ~~: ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~:j: ~ ~: ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~: ~l~ :~~ ~:~~ ~~~ -1003
<br />8,387 +808 7,749 +17Q
<br />8,047 +738 7,833 +524
<br />17,849 +l1Q 18,'234 +495
<br />14,539 +760 13,679: -lOll
<br />1943n_.__HH_________""H.________"__~-__________ ll,366 ""'72,390. I. 13,691 -65
<br />1944____________________________.___l:___________ 13,oo! ":'1;070' 14,137 +66
<br />1945________"_______________________~__n_______ 11,836 -260 12,090 -0
<br />1946_______ ____________ ________~_.__~___________ 8,858 -1,387 10,242 -3
<br />1947_~_______.______________________~___________ 14,268 +2,237 11,690 -441
<br />1948_._______..________._."_________.:~__________ 12,779 -885 13,311 -353
<br />~~~~=~===::::::::::=~:::~:~:::=::j:~:==':::::~ 14,598 ~+659 13,504 -43'
<br />10,496 -880 10,904 -472
<br />195L"_______~__________~~n~_______l~___.______ 10,102 -1,115 10,979 -238
<br />U152_ _____ _______ ____~_n__._____h.~-------- --- 17,826 +2,073 15,479 -274
<br />1953_ ____ ______.__~________~________.l._____._*"__ 8,566 -2,063 10,452 -177
<br />1954_________~___________._*"_______~___~_*_____ 6,179 -4,143 10,382 +60
<br />1955_ ________ ____ ___ __d._~~_____~__f----------- 7,063 -838 8,125 +224
<br />1956_________~_*___"_________~*_*~__Jl_______.___ 8,597 +782 7,692 -123
<br /> ,
<br />A veragl'!__.____..____~~________~--~-------- 11,578 -26 ' 11,490 -113
<br />
<br />1 Historic flow at Lees Ferry gag~ station. .
<br />II New cnpanl~Y curve placed into ?se beginning Oct. I, 1949.
<br />
<br />Potential future irri~ation developments in this portion of the
<br />Colorado River Basin I are estimated in House Document 419 to
<br />deplete the stream f1.owjlbY an additional 285,000 acre-feet annually, if
<br />and when the potentia projects are constructed. In the operation
<br />studies reported horei1 the average annual net loss is assumed to
<br />vari from 100,000 acrejfeet in the year 1958 to 400,000 acre-feet in
<br />the year 1970 as shownlin table III.
<br />
<br />TABLE lII.-Net l088es andt~se8, Glen Canyon to Hoover Dam,l by year beginning
<br />J Apr. 1
<br />j
<br />,
<br />
<br />[In million acre-feetI
<br />
<br />1958_______________ 0.1 .1'963--------------- 0.2 1968_______________ 0.3
<br />1959_.______________ .1 964_______________ .2 1969_______________ .3
<br />1960_______________ .1 965_______________ .2 1970_______________ .4
<br />1961_______________ .2 1966_______________ .2
<br />1962_______________ .2 1967_______________ .3
<br />1 Net losses (including Lake Mcad~vaporation) and uses in excess of net inflo\v. Estimated to vary from
<br />100,000 acre-feet in 1958 to 400,000 aCj"feet in 1970.
<br />!
<br />
<br />,--,-"
<br />
|