DOCSLIB.ORG

The Friant Division C F 16,900 Acres | 90 Ag

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Friant Division C F 16,900 Acres | 90 Ag FRIANT WATER AUTHORITY MEMBER DIRECTORY 1. CHOWCHILLA WATER DISTRICT 12. ORANGE COVE IRRIGATION DISTRICT 22. LINDMORE IRRIGATION DISTRICT www.aewsd.org www.orangecoveid.org www.lindmoreid.com F 85,000 acres | 400 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 C F 28,000 acres | 650 M&I, 400 ag. landowners | Class 1 C F 27,250 acres | 475 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 2. MADERA IRRIGATION DISTRICT 13. CITY OF ORANGE COVE 23. PORTERVILLE IRRIGATION DISTRICT The Friant Division www.madera-id.org www.cityoforangecove.com C F 16,900 acres | 90 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 F 131,612 acres | 473 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 C 1,000 acres | 9,100 residents | Class 1 24. TEA POT DOME WATER DISTRICT of the 3. GRAVELLY FORD WATER DISTRICT 14. STONE CORRAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT C 3,350 acres | 95 ag. landowners | Class 1 8,400 acres | 20 ag. landowners | Class 2 C 6,500 acres | 100 ag. landowners | Class 1 25. LOWER TULE RIVER IRRIGATION DISTRICT 4. MADERA COUNTY (HIDDEN LAKES ESTATE) 15. IVANHOE IRRIGATION DISTRICT www.ltrid.org Clifton Court Forebay 154 acres | 54 homes | Class 1 C 11,000 acres | 157 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 C 100,000 acres | 300 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 Central Valley Project Jones 5. FRESNO COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT #18 16. EXETER IRRIGATION DISTRICT 26. TERRA BELLA IRRIGATION DISTRICT Pumping Plant www.waterworksdist18.com www.exeterid.org C F 14,000 acres | 1,800 M&I, 600 ag. landowners | Class 1 Banks 443 acres | 244 M&I connections | Class 1 C 15,000 acres | 332 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 Pumping 27. SAUCELITO IRRIGATION DISTRICT Plant Ca S 6. GARFIELD WATER DISTRICT 17. LEWIS CREEK WATER DISTRICT 21,000 acres | 80 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 li a C F fo n rn Jo ia a C 1,700 acres | 114 ag. landowners | Class 1 C 1,228 acres | 9 ag. landowners | Class 1 D q A e u q lt i 28. DELANO-EARLIMART IRRIGATION DISTRICT u a n e - R d i u M v 7. INTERNATIONAL WATER DISTRICT 18. KAWEAH DELTA WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT www.deid.org c e t e r n 700 acres | One family-owned farm | Class 1 www.kdwcd.com 56,600 acres | 400 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 d r C C e o v t i a R 340,000 acres | 4,500 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 C F C n a i u 8. CITY OF FRESNO SERVICE AREA 29. KERN-TULARE WATER DISTRICT n q a a l MC www.fresno.gov 19. CITY OF LINDSAY WATER SERVICE AREA www.wakc.com 4 o J n 90,000 acres | 135,000 M&I connections | Class 1 www.lindsay.ca.us 20,082 acres | 91 ag. landowners | Class 2 CWD Sa C F C F 1 Ma Millerton de C 1,500 acres | 11,800 residents & businesses | Class 1 ra Lake Ca 9. FRESNO IRRIGATION DISTRICT 30. SOUTHERN SAN JOAQUIN MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT na l 5 FCW #18 S www.fresnoirrigation.com 20. LINDSAY — STRATHMORE IRRIGATION DISTRICT www.ssjmud.org a n C F 245,000 acres | 8,000 ag. landowners | Class 2 www.lsid.org C 61,00 acres | 225 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 Lu is MID 6 GWD C 2 a C F 15,400 acres | 650 ag. landowners | Class 1 n a GFWD 10. TRI-VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 31. SHAFTER-WASCO IRRIGATION DISTRICT l / 3 7 IWD C F a r 1 21. TULARE IRRIGATION DISTRICT www.swid.org li ia C | 1,800 acres | 6 ag. landowners | Class 1 fo CFSA n 10 TVWD rn 8 t - www.tulareid.org 34,000 acres | 235 M&I and ag. landowners | Class 1&2 ia K C A e q rn 11. HILLS VALLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT C F 74,000 acres | 240 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 u Mendota Pool C 11 HVID ed an 32. ARVIN-EDISON WATER STORAGE DISTRICT uc al C F 3,500 acres | 30 ag. landowners | Class 1 t 12 OCID www.aewsd.org All districts identified on back page 13 COC 1 Irrigable land of total 4,500 acres within district C F 131,660 acres | 180 ag. landowners | Class 1&2 9 FID 14 SCID F - Friant Water Authority member agency | C - Friant-Kern Canal operation and maintenance contractor 15 IID 16 EID FRIANT WATER AUTHORITY 17 LCWD KDWCD FWA STAFF DIRECTORY FWA BOARD OF DIRECTORS 18 19 CLWSA Policy Office Home Office 20 LSID Jason Phillips, Chief Executive Officer Edwin A. Camp Clifford R. Loeffler 1121 L St, Ste. 610 854 N. Harvard Ave 21 TID Sacramento, CA 95814 Lindsay, CA 93247 22 LID [email protected] Arvin-Edison Water Storage District Lindsay - Strathmore Irrigation District 23 PID Doug DeFlitch, Chief Operating Officer Kole Upton Jim Erickson 25 LTRID 24 TBDWD [email protected] Chowchilla Water District Madera Irrigation District Sacramento 26 TBID 27 SID Don Willard, Chief Financial Officer Tim Orman, Alternate Director for Lee Brand Harvey A. Bailey C [email protected] City of Fresno Orange Cove Irrigation District a DEID li 28 Stockton fo rn 29 KTWD ia Jeff Payne, Director of Water Policy George Porter Eric Borba San Francisco A Modesto q u SSJMUD e 30 [email protected] Fresno Irrigation District Porterville Irrigation District d u c San Jose Merced t Alexandra Biering, Loren Booth Steven G. Kisling Government Affairs and Communications Manager Hills Valley Irrigation District Saucelito Irrigation District Fresno 31 SWID [email protected] Christopher Tantau, Vice Chair Edwin L. Wheaton Don Davis, General Counsel Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District Terra Bella Irrigation District 32 AEWSD [email protected] Kent H. Stephens, Chair Richard S. Borges, Jr John Bezdek, Special Counsel Kern-Tulare Water District Tulare Irrigation District [email protected] Michael Brownfield Bakersfield Steve Ottemoeller, Water Resources Manager Lindmore Irrigation District [email protected] Friant Division of the Central Valley Project San Joaquin Valley Information & media inquiry: [email protected] | Download this PDF: http://bit.ly/About-FWA FRIANTWATER.ORG FRIANT WATER AUTHORITY APRIL 2018 FRIANT WATER AUTHORITY APRIL 2018 FWA’S ROLE FRIANT-KERN CANAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE AT-A-GLANCE • Satisfying a 25-year contract with Reclamation to perform THE FRIANT DIVISION all operation, maintenance, and repairs on the canal • Delivering water to all contractors on the Friant-Kern Canal • Constructed as a mid-20th century conjunctive use • Approximately 2.2 million acre-feet of water is contracted strategy to manage groundwater and subsidence in to 34 agencies, districts and municipalities within the • Repairing and replacing panels, structures, and irrigated lands along the San Joaquin Valley’s eastside. Friant Division. The City of Fresno and several other cities other water delivery and control features and towns along the eastern rim of the San Joaquin Valley • Control and removal of aquatic weeds count on Friant supplies as their primary water source. • Supplied by San Joaquin River water stored behind • Clearing debris to allow proper conveyance Friant Dam at Millerton Lake northeast of Fresno. • Addressing all issues or problems arising on the canal • Five counties served • Implementing canal improvements, including capacity by the Friant Division 2015 CALIFORNIA CROP correction and reverse flow pump-back capability • The Bureau of Reclamation acquired water rights for the are among the nation’s VALUE RANKINGS* Friant Division in 1939 through purchase and exchange most productive and RANK COUNTY VALUE agreements with original San Joaquin River water rights account for more ABOUT FRIANT WATER AUTHORITY holders (Exchange Contractors). Under the exchange, than half California’s 1 Tulare $6,980,772,000 Reclamation delivers Delta water to the Exchange 2015 crop values. 2 Kern $6,879,644,000 The Friant Water Authority (FWA) is a public FRIANT DIVISION WATER Contractors, allowing the Friant Division access to the SUPPLY PROTECTION San Joaquin’s most reliable supply. Friant contractors 3 Fresno $6,608,943,000 agency established in 2004 under California’s Joint pay for the operation and maintenance of all facilities. • FWA’s fifteen-member 5 Merced $3,589,900,000 Powers Agreement Act to represent its member • Protecting reliable delivery of water under the Board of Directors San Joaquin River Exchange Contract account for 78% of 10 Madera $2,016,726,000 agencies in federal and state policy, regulatory and • Implementing the San Joaquin River • The 152-mile Friant-Kern Canal and 36-mile Madera Canal irrigated lands and Total: $26,075,985,000 political matters that affect water supplies within serve more than 15,000 individual farms cultivating more than 64% of Federal water Restoration Settlement California: $47,071,513,000 1 million acres — a quarter of the Valley’s agricultural land. supply contracts in Friant Division of the Central Valley Project (CVP). • Participating in other state and federal activities the Friant Division. % 55.40% FWA is additionally responsible for all operation, that may affect water supply, including WaterFix, Coordinated Long-Term Operations of the CVP/SWP, *California Agricultural Statistics Review, 2015-2016, California Department of Food and Agriculture. maintenance and repair functions for the Friant- the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, and Kern Canal and other associated works of the State Water Resources Control Board proceedings CVP WATER DELIVERIES TO THE FRIANT DIVISION KEPT REGIONAL Friant Division under contract with the Bureau of GROUNDWATER STABLE THROUGH MULTIPLE CYCLES OF DROUGHT Reclamation (Reclamation). FWA is the successor 0 1,500 to the Friant Water Users Authority, which held REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PERIODS OF DROUGHT CVP FRIANT DIVISION DELIVERIES* contracts for OMR on the canal beginning in 1986. IMPROVEMENT (THOUSAND ACRE-FEET) • Supporting new storage, such as at Temperance Flat • Restoring Friant-Kern Canal and Madera -2 1,000 Canal conveyance capacity Deliveries to the CVP Friant 2016 STRATEGIC Division increased through the completion of the Friant-Kern and Madera canals in 1951.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Madera Subbasin
    MADERA SUBBASIN Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) First Annual Report Prepared by Davids Engineering, Inc Luhdorff & Scalmanini ERA Economics April 2020 DRAFT Madera Subbasin Sustainable Groundwater Management Act First Annual Report April 2020 Prepared For Madera Subbasin Prepared By Davids Engineering, Inc Luhdorff & Scalmanini ERA Economics Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... i List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. ii List of Appendices ..................................................................................................................... iii List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................. iv Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Executive Summary (§356.2.a) .................................................................................................. 2 Groundwater Elevations (§356.2.b.1) ........................................................................................ 6 Groundwater Level Monitoring .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • KEY to ENDSHEET MAP (Continued)
    KEY TO ENDSHEET MAP (continued) RESERVOIRS AND LAKES (AUTHORIZED) 181.Butler Valley Res. 185. Dixie Refuge Res. 189. County Line Res. 182.Knights Valley Res. 186. Abbey Bridge Res. 190. Buchanan Res. 183.Lakeport Res. 187. Marysville Res. 191. Hidden Res. 184.Indian Valley Res. 188. Sugar Pine Res. 192. ButtesRes. RESERVOIRS AND LAKES 51BLE FUTURE) 193.Helena Res. 207. Sites-Funks Res. 221. Owen Mountain Res. 194.Schneiders Bar Res. 208. Ranchería Res. 222. Yokohl Res. 195.Eltapom Res. 209. Newville-Paskenta Res. 223. Hungry Hollow Res. 196. New Rugh Res. 210. Tehama Res. 224. Kellogg Res. 197.Anderson Ford Res. 211. Dutch Gulch Res. 225. Los Banos Res. 198.Dinsmore Res. 212. Allen Camp Res. 226. Jack Res. 199. English Ridge Res. 213. Millville Res. 227. Santa Rita Res. 200.Dos Rios Res. 214. Tuscan Buttes Res. 228. Sunflower Res. 201.Yellowjacket Res. 215. Aukum Res. 229. Lompoc Res. 202.Cahto Res. 216. Nashville Res. 230. Cold Springs Res. 203.Panther Res. 217. Irish Hill Res. 231. Topatopa Res. 204.Walker Res. 218. Cooperstown Res. 232. Fallbrook Res. 205.Blue Ridge Res. 219. Figarden Res. 233. De Luz Res. 206.Oat Res. 220. Little Dry Creek Res. AQUEDUCTS AND TUNNELS (EXISTING OR UNDER CONSTRUCTION) Clear Creek Tunnel 12. South Bay Aqueduct 23. Los Angeles Aqueduct 1. Whiskeytown-Keswick 13. Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct 24. South Coast Conduit 2.Tunnel 14. Delta Mendota Canal 25. Colorado River Aqueduct 3. Bella Vista Conduit 15. California Aqueduct 26. San Diego Aqueduct 4.Muletown Conduit 16. Pleasant Valley Canal 27. Coachella Canal 5.
    [Show full text]
  • River West-Madera Master Plan
    River West-Madera Master Plan APPENDICES Appendix A – River West-Madera Resource Assessment 39 | Page River West-Madera Master Plan River West- Madera Master Plan June 5, 2012 Resource Assessment The River West-Madera area consists of 795 acres of publicly owned land located in Madera County along the northern side of the San Joaquin River between Highway 41 and Scout Island. The Resource Assessment presents the area’s existing characteristics, as well as constraints and opportunities to future planning efforts. River West-Madera Master Plan River West-Madera Master Plan RESOURCE ASSESSMENT FIGURES ............................................................................................................................... 3 TABLES ................................................................................................................................. 4 EXISTING CHARACTERISITICS ............................................................................................. 5 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Land Use and History .............................................................................................................................. 7 Cultural History ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Sycamore Island ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • PIT Tag Monitoring for Emigrating Juvenile Chinook Salmon at Three Flow Conditions
    PIT Tag Monitoring for Emigrating Juvenile Chinook Salmon at Three Flow Conditions Introduction Historically, California’s upper San Joaquin River (SJR) supported stable populations of fall- and spring-run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). However, both populations were extirpated from the system in the mid-twentieth century following the development of Friant Dam (Moyle 2002). In response to the San Joaquin River litigation Settlement, the San Joaquin River Restoration Program (SJRRP) has implemented an objective to restore a naturally reproducing and self-sustaining population of Chinook salmon, as well as other fishes, in the system. Because the anadromous life-cycle of SJR Chinook salmon requires conveyance of juveniles from a riverine system to the Pacific Ocean to support the return of spawning adults, meeting this objective requires the consideration of environmental conditions and a connected river system. Though there are likely a multitude of environmental parameters that impact emigrating juvenile salmon, flow regime and predation are often cited as having a significant effect on travel speed and survivability (Raymond 1968; Berggren and Filardo1993; Michel et al. 2013). Flows in the SJR are highly regulated as means to support agricultural production, and non-native piscivorous fish in the restoration reach tend to occur more frequently downstream of Reach 1 (Gravelly Ford to confluence of Merced River; SJRRP 2013 I&M Report). Anecdotal evidence collected during SJRRP fish inventory and monitoring efforts suggests many of the non-native piscivores tend to reside in anthropogenic altered habitats (e.g., mine pits, altered channels, etc), which may pose a challenge to emigrating salmon. River flow conditions and water temperatures were managed during spring releases to elicit downstream fish movement with pulse flows and receding flows benches to avoid stranding.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Calfornia Water Districts & Water Supply Sources
    WHERE DOES OUR WATER COME FROM? Quincy Corning k F k N F , M R , r R e er th th a a Magalia e Fe F FEATHER RIVER NORTH FORK Shasta Lake STATE WATER PROJECT Chico Orland Paradise k F S , FEATHER RIVER MIDDLE FORK R r STATE WATER PROJECT e Sacramento River th a e F Tehama-Colusa Canal Durham Folsom Lake LAKE OROVILLE American River N Yuba R STATE WATER PROJECT San Joaquin R. Contra Costa Canal JACKSON MEADOW RES. New Melones Lake LAKE PILLSBURY Yuba Co. W.A. Marin M.W.D. Willows Old River Stanislaus R North Marin W.D. Oroville Sonoma Co. W.A. NEW BULLARDS BAR RES. Ukiah P.U. Yuba Co. W.A. Madera Canal Delta-Mendota Canal Millerton Lake Fort Bragg Palermo YUBA CO. W.A Kern River Yuba River San Luis Reservoir Jackson Meadows and Willits New Bullards Bar Reservoirs LAKE SPAULDING k Placer Co. W.A. F MIDDLE FORK YUBA RIVER TRUCKEE-DONNER P.U.D E Gridley Nevada I.D. , Nevada I.D. Groundwater Friant-Kern Canal R n ia ss u R Central Valley R ba Project Yu Nevada City LAKE MENDOCINO FEATHER RIVER BEAR RIVER Marin M.W.D. TEHAMA-COLUSA CANAL STATE WATER PROJECT YUBA RIVER Nevada I.D. Fk The Central Valley Project has been founded by the U.S. Bureau of North Marin W.D. CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT , N Yuba Co. W.A. Grass Valley n R Reclamation in 1935 to manage the water of the Sacramento and Sonoma Co. W.A. ica mer Ukiah P.U.
    [Show full text]
  • Chronology of Major Litigation Involving the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project
    Chronology of Major Litigation Involving the Topic: Litigation Central Valley Project and the State Water Project CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR LITIGATION INVOLVING THE CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT AND THE STATE WATER PROJECT I. Central Valley Project 1950 United States v. Gerlach Live Stock Co., 339 U.S. 725 (1950) Riparians on San Joaquin River downstream of Friant Dam sued for damages for impairment of their rights to periodic inundation of their “uncontrolled grasslands.” Under reclamation law, the United States had to recognize prior vested rights and compensate for their impairment. 1958 Ivanhoe Irrig. Dist. v. McCracken, 357 U.S. 275 (1958) Congress did not intend that Section 8 of the Reclamation Act, which generally makes state water law applicable to reclamation projects, would make the 160-acre limitation in Section 5 inapplicable to the CVP. If needed for a project, Reclamation could acquire water rights by the payment of compensation, either through condemnation, or if already taken, through actions by the owners in the courts. 1960 Ivanhoe Irrig. Dist. v. All Parties, 53 Cal.2d 692 (1960) State law conferred legal capacity upon irrigation districts to enter into contracts with federal government for CVP water. Districts could execute the contracts even though they contained the 160-acre limitation under federal law. 1963 Dugan v. Rank, 372 U.S. 609 (1963) Parties claiming water rights along the San Joaquin River downstream of Friant Dam sued the United States and Bureau of Reclamation officials, seeking to enjoin storage or diversion of water at the dam. The Court held that the courts had no jurisdiction over the United States because it had not consented to suit and the McCarran Amendment did not apply.
    [Show full text]
  • Trinity Dam Operating Criteria Trinity River Division Central Valley Project-California
    ·rRlNITY ~IVER BASIN us RESOURCE LIBRARY BR TRINITY COUNTY LIBRARY T7 WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 1979 (c.l) Trinity Dam Operating Criteria Trinity River Division Central Valley Project-California TRINITY COUNTY JULY 1979 TRINITY RIVER BASIN RESOURC E LIBRARY TRINITY RIVER DIVISION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT CALIFORNIA Trinity Dam Operating Criteria Prepared for the Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Task Force July 1979 United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region 1 ~ 7 5 122 R 1 W R 1 E 2 23° \ R 10 W ( T 38 N ----- ·-----]r------------r-CANADA ' I • I WA r NORTH ~ J SHINGTON ' \ ' DAKOTA ) ___ 1 • \.-.. ..-- .. J, ': M 0 N TAN A !___ - ----\ ' \ souTH : i ,----- - ~ ~~ ,o. 0 R EGON ( ,_---, : DAKOTA I : IOAHo 1 I __ __ \ \~' I W YOMING ·----- ~ -- -----, ___ , ,I \ ~ ~u I ~ 0 ; ------1 , NEBRASKA ', 1\ ~ I I ·--------'--, ~ I NEVA 1' 1: 0 ~1 : t------- -'.) I I J \_ DA UTAH COLORADO: ANSAS ' ~,J t -+- ---1--- .. - ', : : I K .\ ~ I . ---- .... ~ ' I 4!< l o ' ------·------ -- -~----- ', ~ -r' "::: rJ A ~ '!> ','\_r) i t---! OKLAHOMA\ -:- . I , , r/ / ;' ARIZONA I' NEW MEXICO. L ______ 1_ MALIN-ROUND MOUNTAIN 500 KV ~ . ' ,... 36 : , I l PACIFIC NW-PAC/FIC SW INTERTIE ---, ' ' ', I, ---~-E~~'-;:--·;;::<_-'r EX A_(S ---i- - ~ ~ - t \. .. _;··-....., ~ CLAIR ENGLE LAKE IN 0 EX M A P '._\_ ~.:.. (__j ~ ) I I / \ I - BUREAU OF RECLAMATION HASTAL~l WHISKEYTOWN-SHASTA( rr TRINITY [NAT . lj r COMPLETED OR AUTHORIZED WORKS 34 TRINITY DAM & POWERP~LANT~- ? ) RECrATION AREAS (~ ,- DAM AND RESERVOIR LEWISTON LAKE TRIINir/cARR 230 KV ? 0 I <=::? r ~-~~- _./ TUNNEL ~<";:1 r ~ -+ ---< - .r') d,):3_ -}N , ··- •J?:y,--.___ N CONDUIT - ~~ wcAv~~VIL' 7 __r~\.
    [Show full text]
  • Cvp Overview
    Central Valley Project Overview Eric A. Stene Bureau of Reclamation Table Of Contents The Central Valley Project ......................................................2 About the Author .............................................................15 Bibliography ................................................................16 Archival and Manuscript Collections .......................................16 Government Documents .................................................16 Books ................................................................17 Articles...............................................................17 Interviews.............................................................17 Dissertations...........................................................17 Other ................................................................17 Index ......................................................................18 1 The Central Valley Project Throughout his political life, Thomas Jefferson contended the United States was an agriculturally based society. Agriculture may be king, but compared to the queen, Mother Nature, it is a weak monarch. Nature consistently proves to mankind who really controls the realm. The Central Valley of California is a magnificent example of this. The Sacramento River watershed receives two-thirds to three-quarters of northern California's precipitation though it only has one-third to one-quarter of the land. The San Joaquin River watershed occupies two- thirds to three-quarter of northern California's land,
    [Show full text]
  • Friant Division Facts
    FFrriiaanntt DDiivviissiioonn FFaaccttss FRIANT DAM Type Concrete gravity Location San Joaquin River above Friant, 17 miles northeast of downtown Fresno Groundbreaking Ceremony November 5, 1939 Basic Construction Period 1939-42 (Outlet gates installed in 1944; spillway drum gates installed in 1947) Outlets To the San Joaquin River, Madera Canal and Friant-Kern Canal Power Plants Operated by the Friant Power Authority (on the river and canal outlets), and by the Orange Cove Irrigation District (on a water line supplying the Friant fish hatchery) Named For The nearby town of Friant, recalling pioneer lumberman Thomas Friant Dimensions Structural Height 319 feet (97.23 meters) Hydraulic Height 296 feet (90.2 meters) Top Width 20 feet (6.1 meters) Maximum Base Width 267 feet (81.4 meters) Crest Length 3,488 feet (1,063 meters) Crest Elevation 581.3 feet (177.2 meters) above sea level Total Concrete Volume 2,135,000 cubic yards (1,632,325 cubic meters) Spillway Overflow section at dam's center controlled by three 18- by 100-foot gates, including two new rubberized air-filled bladder gates and one drum gate Elevation, Top of Gates 578.0 feet (176.2 meters) Spillway Crest Elevation 560.0 feet (170.7 meters) Maximum Release To River 59,770 cubic feet per second, on January 3, 1997 MILLERTON LAKE Total Capacity 520,500 acre feet (elevation 578 feet) Record Maximum Storage 530,452 acre feet, on January 3, 1997(elevation 580.01 feet) "Dead" Storage 135,000 acre feet (capacity below canal outlets) "Active" Storage 385,500 acre feet (maximum available for beneficial Friant Division use) Surface Area At Capacity 4,900 acres (1,983 hectares) Maximum Length 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) First Water in Reservoir October 20, 1941 (after temporary river outlets were closed) First Controlled Storage February 21, 1944 (after outlet gate valves were installed) Named For The town of Millerton, county seat of Fresno County from 1856-74, the site of which is inundated by the reservoir.
    [Show full text]
  • Reclamation's Salinity Management Plan
    Reclamation’s Salinity Management Plan Revised May November 2010 Actions to Address the Salinity and Boron Total Maximum Daily Load Issues For the Lower San Joaquin River Table of Contents Changing Landscape.........................................................................................................................1 Current Actions.................................................................................................................................2 Flow Actions.....................................................................................................................................3 New Melones Operations – Dilution Flows...............................................................................3 Water Acquisitions....................................................................................................................44 San Joaquin River Restoration Program..................................................................................55 Salt Load Reduction Actions ..........................................................................................................66 Grassland Drainage Area Salinity Reduction ..........................................................................66 Water Use Efficiency Grant Programs .....................................................................................77 Water Conservation Field Services Program......................................................................77 WaterSMART (previously Water 2025) Grant Program................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sites Reservoir Project Public Draft EIR/EIS
    6. Surface Water Resources 6.1 Introduction This chapter describes Existing Conditions (the environmental setting) and Sites Reservoir Project (Project)-related changes to surface water resources in the Extended, Secondary, and Primary study areas. Detailed descriptions and maps of these three study areas are provided in Chapter 1 Introduction, and summarized descriptions are included in this chapter. Surface water resources generally include reservoirs, rivers, and diversions. Permits and authorizations for surface water resources are presented in Chapter 4 Environmental Compliance and Permit Summary. The regulatory setting for surface water resources is presented in Appendix 4A Environmental Compliance. This chapter also includes a description of the surface water supply facilities operations and resulting surface water resources characteristics of California’s major water systems that are relevant to the Project: the Central Valley Project (CVP), a federal project that is operated and maintained by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the State Water Project (SWP), operated and maintained by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), and associated tributary rivers and streams. A schematic showing the layout of these two water systems, with the relative location of the Project, is shown in Figures 6-1A, 6-1B, and 6-1C. A comparison of these characteristics has been made between the Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition, and the four action alternatives (Alternatives A, B, C, and D). Unless noted, all numbers shown related to storages, flows, exports, and deliveries in this chapter are generated from the CALSIM II computer simulation model. Appendix 6A Modeling of Alternatives, Appendix 6B Water Resources System Modeling, and Appendix 6C Upper Sacramento River Daily River Flow and Operations Modeling describe the assumptions and the analytical framework used in the surface water modeling analyses.
    [Show full text]
  • San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region
    Volume 3 Chapter 7 San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region California Water Plan Update 2005 Chapter 7 San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region Contents Chapter 7 San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region ........................................................................................................7-1 Setting ................................................................................................................................................................7-1 Climate ...............................................................................................................................................................7-1 Population ..........................................................................................................................................................7-1 Land Use ............................................................................................................................................................7-2 Water Supply and Use .........................................................................................................................................7-5 State of the Region ..............................................................................................................................................7-8 Challenges ......................................................................................................................................................7-8 Accomplishments ..........................................................................................................................................7-10
    [Show full text]