Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />000371 <br /> <br />4.0 WIRSOS MODELING RESULTS <br /> <br />The five project scenarios discussed in Section 3.0 of this report were modeled <br /> <br />using WIRSOS. Modeling output was used to determine the impact of the scenarios upon <br /> <br />downstream flows. The results of each scenario modeling are discussed in the following <br /> <br />sections. <br /> <br />4.l SCENARIO NO.1 IMPACfS <br /> <br />Under Scenario No.1, the Little Snake River Basin was modeled with the addition <br /> <br />of the Pot Hook Project to the Water Development Baseline. The main modeling <br /> <br />assumptions used for the Pot Hook Project are discussed in Section 3.2.1 of this report. <br /> <br />Initial runs of Scenario No.1, with May through September Pot Hook Canal <br /> <br />demands of 290 c.f.s., indicated the Pot Hook Reservoir active storage amount was <br /> <br />depleted each year, and shortages were experienced each year of the study period. This <br /> <br />is to be expected as the Pot Hook Canal demand of 290 c.f.s. is equivalent to 88,000 acre- <br /> <br />feet per year and the average reservoir inflow is only 54,000 acre-feet. Even with storage, <br /> <br />there is not an adequate water supply to meet these demands. The additional demands <br /> <br />by the Two Bar Canal, Deer Lodge Lateral, Boone Lateral and the Instream flow <br /> <br />requirement increase the disparity between the project demands and the available water. <br /> <br />36 <br />