My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP08430
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
WSP08430
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:48:09 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:58:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.760
Description
Yampa River General
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
1/1/3000
Author
Unknown
Title
Executive Summary - Task 4 Technical Memorandum on Hydrology Water Rights and Development of Basin Model - Yampa River Basin Alternatives Feasibility Study - Draft
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />001142 <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />The environmental baseline condition was similar to the existing demand condition but <br />included depletions which would result from certain projects not built at the time of the HYDROSS <br />modeling effort. Included are all existing projects in the basin, all projects which have undergone <br />Section 7 consultation, and all private water projects which are reasonably likely to be developed. The <br />change from the existing condition to the environmental baseline condition involved adding these new <br />depletions over the entire 1930-1982 period, Projects which have undergone Section 7 consultation <br />include the Cheyenne Stage II water supply system and expansion of the Craig Power Generation Station <br />(Craig 1Il). The Cheyenne Stage II project is located in the headwaters of the Little Snake River, <br /> <br />Private water projects which are considered reasonably likely to occur include altering the use <br />of four existing reservoirs in the basin. Included are Yamcolo Reservoir, Lake Catamount, Steamboat <br />Lake and Elkhead Reservoir. These reservoirs have been managed primarily as recreational facilities and <br />to serve agricultural demands, Future uses, however, could result in an additional depletion of 19,000 <br />acre.feet on an annual basis. <br /> <br />The environmental baseline conditions have been used for planning purposes by the USFWS in <br />efforts to define flow recommendations for the T & E fishes. ' <br /> <br />The final model scenario Baseline ~ Stagecoach Reservoir Proiect is essentially the same as <br />the environmental baseline but includes depletions associated with Stagecoach Reservoir (12,800 af).. <br /> <br /> <br />Comments on HYDROSS Modeling <br /> <br />Our review of the HYDROSS application to the Yampa River Basin raised some questions <br />regarding assumptions included in the environmental baseline case and identified some potential data <br />entry problems in the data and network files. The apparent data problems are small in terms of average <br />stream hydrology but did result in an inexaCt calibration of the network implementation and the <br />HYDROSS results; when they were carried through to the network application an exact calibration was <br />achieved. The questionable assumptions involve the magnitude of change in water demands. between <br />the historical and environmental baseline case. No issue is taken with the historical case, which merely <br />provides gaged flows as a starting point. <br /> <br />The assumed reserVoir consumptive use includes 3,600 af of depletion attributable to Hayden <br />and Craig (!W.W. Wheeler, 1989). Because Hayden and Craig depletions are counted elsewhere in the <br />model, this appears to result in 3,600 af of excess depletion. <br /> <br />The Hayden Unit 2 depletions of 4,700 af are counted from 1930 through 1966. However, <br />Hayden 2 did not operate until 1976, Therefore, there appears to be 4,700 af of uncounted depletion <br />from 1967 through 1975, <br /> <br />:,1 <br /> <br />The depletions attributed to thermal generation appear to be iarge relative to historical <br />averages. In the environmental baseline, the Hayden plants are assumedto deplete 7,100 af and Craig <br />units I,ll and 111 deplete 19,200 af. Over 1985 to 1989, Hayden actually depleted an average of 5,300 af, <br />and in 1988 and 1989, the Craig units depleted an average 12,500 af (Davenport, Colo. Ute, personal <br />communication). Even if opera'ted at 90% capacity, the Craig units should require only about 16,400 af <br />of depletion. <br /> <br />;~ <br />i <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />Losses associated with Stagecoach Reservoir (12,800 at) were also added in for the Baseline <br />plus Stagecoach Reservoir Proiect scenario. Because Stagecoach is not operated with much regulariry <br />these depletions might be interpreted as being large given current conditions. According to data on <br /> <br />-~ <br /> <br />, ~ <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.