WSP08321 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I,. I I . Part 2 _ Streamflow D~ta (Contd) from the streamflow. volumes at Canon City and Pueblo, in order thereby to indioate the approximate volumes of Arkansas River water at those stations. Similar deduotions at stations downstream are unnecessary, since the imported waters of the historio period were delivered to and diverted by ditches up- stream from La Junta. It should be noted that the values at Canon City and Pueblo, shown in summary Table 0 are derived by simple subtraction of the values in Table 10 from those in Tab~s 1 and 2. This computing prooedure is deemed to be suitable for present purposes. The following summary Table 0 indicates the fluctuations in annual streamflow. volumes at each of the stream gaging stations during the period 1908-1942# and illustrates that total streamflovl volumes including floods are not a direct inde~ of the water supplies of the Arkansas River usable for irriga ti on. Runoff from mountainous drainage areas above Canon City is more unifonrr in amount from year to year (summary Table B) and fluctuates less widely (summary Table D) than runoff from foothills and plains drainage areas. Major floods suoh as ooourred at Pueblo in June 1921 are unknown in the high mountains, and equal intensities have neve~ been recorded above Canon City. Similarly the low-flow stages at Canon City, during drouth-years such as 193~ and 194e, do not depart from long-time averages to a degree or extent as great as prevail in the runoff fram foothills and plains drainage areas. Hence the total mountain runoff is more us~ble and used. for irrigation largely above Ceddoao Summary Table 0 brings together the dat~ cOncerning annual stream- ~ flow. volumes at eaoh gaging station during the avera~e water-year of the _10..