Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. ", ""3 <br />n:.1'"" , ,.~ <br /><1.) '_, u ~i. '-' <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />3.) Review of Expanded Network inflows: <br /> <br />Review of natural inflows developed for the smith Fk.jIron Ck. <br />basin showed zero average June inflows occurring for inflows <br />ENFL2,3,4,5, and 6 (see Section F). <br /> <br />As was done for East River and Ohio Ck. inflows discussed <br />previously, these inflows were modified to follow the <br />distribution of natural flows developed for the Smith Fork nr. <br />Lazear (09126900) gage site (located near the mouth of the <br />smith Fork). Long term average '52-'90 yields as initially <br />estimated were retained. (Comparison summary statistics and <br />hydrographs of initial and modified ENFL1-6 flows are provided <br />in Section F immediately following inflow descriptions). <br /> <br />Flow distribution using core station "smith Fork nr. Lazear - <br />09129600" eliminated average zero June flow occurrences. <br /> <br />Table ~ summarizes the occurrence of intermittent and average <br />monthly zero flows for the remainder of expanded network <br />inflows. <br /> <br />Natural flow estimates for the expanded network coverage were <br />derived using methodologies similiar to those used in <br />developing Phase I Upper Gunnison inflows: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />natural flow estimates were developed for "core" gaging <br />station sites by adjusting historic gaged flow values for <br />pertinent irrigation, reservoir, diversion, etc., effects. <br /> <br />Natural flow estimates at core stations were adjusted to <br />eliminate negative values in difference files representing <br />gains from intervening areas between core stations. <br /> <br />Natural flow estimates for ungaged sites were derived by: <br /> <br />- setting it equal to a difference file <br />- proportioning difference files according to area or area <br />weighted elevation derived yields <br /> <br />or <br /> <br />- developing annual yield estimates from elevation yield <br />curves, with monthly distribution done by proportioning of <br />core station flows. <br /> <br />Results in Table ~ appear to indicate that the majority of <br />intermittent zero values occur in flows developed from <br />difference files; monthly average zero flows generally occur <br />in fall and winter months. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />4.) Agricultural Consumptive Use Rates: <br /> <br />Inflow development utilized Colorado River Simulation <br /> <br />. <br />