OCR Text |
Show Exhibit Iden. Evid. No. Page No. Page No 1419A Chart Showing Greater Detail from Exh. 1419. 10,803 10,819 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 Graph: Discrepancies Between Calculations of Net Depletion of Virgin Flow of Gila River, Near Dome, Tipton Formula and Plaintiff's Exhibit 77-B. 10,824 10,825 10,824 Graph: Discrepancies Between Calculations of Net Depletion of Virgin Flow of Gila River, Near Dome, Tipton Formula and Plaintiff's Exhibit 77-B -Per Annum and on 5-Year Moving Average Basis. Tables: Net Depletion of Virgin Flow of Gila River Near Dome as Calculated Using Tipton Formula (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 219) and Compared with Plaintiff's Exhibit 77-B. Map: Gila River Basin, Lower Watershed and Selected Precipitation Stations. 10,824 Graph: Averages of Yuma and Mohawk Seasonal Precipitation Compared with Estimated Stream Flow of Gila River Near Dome, Arizona. Supporting Data for California Exhibit 1424. Extract from U.S.G.S. Water Supply Paper No. 100, Stream Measurements for 1903, Pt. IV, Interior Basin, Pacific, and Hudson Bay Drainage (1904). (pp. 26-27) Extract from U.S.G.S. Water Supply Paper No. 133, Stream Measurements for 1904, Pt. X-Colorado River and Great Basin (1905). (pp. 204-06) 10,824 10,868 10,824 10,824 10,868 10,877 10,888 10,888 10,824 10,893 10,824 10,894 |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |