Page 110

Metadata

Title
Page 110
Source
Colorado River problem
Is Part Of
http://digital.library.unlv.edu/u?/dig,8
Full text
L. C. HILL ON THE COLORADO RIVER PROBLEM 415 There is practically no contributing drainage in the 80 miles along the Colorado River between the Black Canyon Dam site and Topock, hence this factor is negligible in the selection of the proper site. TABLE 33.—Comparison of Evaporation Losses. Acre-feet, per annum. Boulder Reservoir with Maximum Level at Elevation 1,250, Providing 34,000,000 Acre-ft. of Storage, of Which 8,000,000 Acre-ft. are for Flood Control: Loss from reservoir surface..................................................... Present loss from stream bed................................................... Reduction in flooded area above Topock assumed at only 50% and corresponding reduction in evaporation loss, one-half of 350,000 acre-ft................ 650,000 ....... 50,000 ....... 175,000 Total...................................................................... Additional evaporation loss under Reclamation plan.......................... 650,000 225,000 ....... 425,000 Mohave Reservoir with Maximum Level at Elevation 605, Providing 13,000,000 Acre-ft. of Storage, of Which 8,000,000 Acre-ft. are for Flood Control : Loss from reservoir surface..................................................... Loss from Boulder Reservoir with storage capacity of 10,000 000 acre-ft. according to author's Plan No. 3.............................................. Allowance of 50% of present loss from flooded area within proposed Mohave Reservoir...................................................................... Present loss from stream bed at Boulder Reservoir (Plan No. 3).............. 490,000 ....... 340,000 ....... ....... 175,000 ....... 40,000 Total....................................................................... Additional evaporation loss under author's plan............................... 830,000 215,000 ....... 615, 000 Net evaporation loss chargeable to Mohave Reservoir.......................... Net evaporation loss chargeable to Boulder Reservoir.......................... 615,000 425,000 Difference in favor of Boulder Reservoir....................................... 190,000 Floods from the drainage area of the Gila River have as great a maximum discharge as floods in the Colorado above their junction at Yuma, but the Gila floods are of short duration. Under present conditions these floods do not tend to coincide, as the Colorado is at its highest stages from May to July, while the Gila floods almost invariably occur during the winter. The former result from melting snow on the mountains in Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming; the latter are from heavy rains in Arizona and New Mexico. When the Colorado floods are reduced in magnitude by regulation, the flow of the river in the late fall and winter will be increased materially. Provision must be made, therefore, to minimize the probability of a Gila flood being augmented by 40,000 sec-ft. or more from the Colorado. In this connection, Mohave Reservoir would have an advantage as it is about one day closer to Yuma than Boulder Reservoir. This advantage would be entirely offset if a dam creating the proposed Parker Reservoir were constructed below the mouth of Bill Williams River. Not only would this regulating reservoir be another day closer to Yuma, but it would directly control the flashy floods from the Bill Williams. When storms were occurring on the head-waters of the Gila River, the normal release from Boulder Reservoir would be curtailed. When it became

Cite this Item

When linking to this object, please use the following URL:

http://digital.library.unlv.edu/u?/lv_water,1717

Tags

Comments

Subscribe to recent comments

There are no comments yet. Be the first to comment below!

Comment on this object