Laserfiche WebLink
<br />DD?3 J2 <br /> <br />- 5 - <br /> <br />To get the shortage for the full IJOO second foot decree VIe have added another <br />JOO second feet. The following table shoVls this shortage: <br /> ALL DATES A liE IN SEPTEEBER <br /> 1947 1%5 19l1u 19UJ <br /> Def -cfs Def -cfs Def -c fs Def-cf's <br />23 3ub 25 uJ9 25 4S0 6 59 <br />24 1.19 26 530 26 1M) 7 u <br />2~ 53tl 27 520 27 uuB /J 61. <br />26 43b 2/J 510 2/3 521 9 19 <br />27 355 29 1.56 29 5~1 10 295 <br />2/J JOO JO u17 30 5/Jl 11 2US <br /> 191.2 19l11 <br /> Def-cfs Def -cfs <br />25 602 25 1.36 <br />26 620 26 501 <br />27 buS 27 5J5 <br />2/J 6uu 28 5dO <br />29 628 29 532 <br />30 67) JO 1.15 <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />Could more wate r be let down from Ta;,lor Reservoir? '.e examined that possibil- <br />ity completely O'ler a I)-year period. Taylor Reservoir has released an average <br />annually of 46,200 acre feet. The question now is: cOlild it have released <br />more? It could not releaSe i~ excess of another 5,000 acre feet. The total <br />amount of stream flo~ above Taylor heservoir taken on a five year average was <br />only 66,000 acre feet per year. Some of tllis water must be released at times <br />other than the irrigation season. Fortunately for the Uncompahgre Project <br />there has never been thre~ successive years during which more water had to be <br />let down than could be stored the following winter. A 75,000 acre foot re- <br />l~ase for a period of three years IiOuld very probably leave Taylor heservoir <br />low in storage, and if the subsequent year cere dry, disaster to the crops of <br />.the Uncompahgre Project in Delta and j"jontrose Counties would be the result. <br />Additional water call not be sup"lied the Gunnisor; Tunnel through Taylor Re- <br />servoir releases. In proof of the above statements a chart follows on the <br />refilling capability of Taylor rtiver aJ:d on Taylor rieservoir releases: <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />.. <br />