My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09970
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09970
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:56:45 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:02:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.766
Description
Gunnison River General Publications-Correspondence-Reports
State
CO
Basin
Gunnison
Water Division
4
Date
7/1/1988
Author
Colorado DOW
Title
Historic Flow Data - Stream Fisheries Investigations - Federal Aid Project F-51-R - July 1988
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.
/
56
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 />. '~':',":J' "', " <br />" 'fJ~1'5~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Table 4. Mean monthly discharge (ds) of the Colorado River at Hot Sulphur <br />Springs, pre (1905-l945) and post (l964-l985) Big Thompson Project. <br /> <br />Mean <br />monthly Months <br />discharge Jan Feb Msr Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec <br />1964-85 72 73 100 254 697 919 513 164 89 89 85 75 <br />1905-45 l03 102 l43 499 1845 3110 l200 434 246 225 152 115 <br />1964-85a 30.1 28.,4 30.1 49.1 62.2 70.5 57.3 62.2 6.3.8 55.3 44.l 34.8 <br /> <br />apercent reduction froml905-45 average <br /> <br />Rainbow trout have a three'- to sevenfold advantage over,brown trout in <br />the spawning, incubation, and hatching arena (Nehring'l986),' Thus, it is <br />not too difficult to understand why the trout fishery in the upper Colorado <br />River is the only one in the state where wild rainbows have dominated brown <br />trout in numbers and denSity without the aid of a special protective angling <br />regulations. It is also a classic example of the detrimental impacts of <br />excessive dewatering of streams by impoundments and transmountain diversions. <br />Ward (1984) indicates the annual flow of the upper Colorado ,River nea~, <br />Granby,Colorado, was reduced 9l% with the construction and 'operation of <br />Granby Reservoir. <br /> <br />Fryingpan River <br /> <br />,Minimum flows for ,rainbow and brown trout for spawning, incubation, and <br />hatching in the Fryingpan River are 65cfs, while optimum flows for, the same' <br />life stages are 100 cfs.Minimum flows for the fry, juvenile, and adult <br />life stages are 50cfs for both rainbow and brown trout. Optimum flows for <br />fry, juvenile, and ,adult. broWn trout are 100 cfs. Optimum flows for fry, <br />juvenile, and adult rainbow trout are 100, 150, and 250cfs, respectively. <br /> <br />Ruedi Reservoir has controlled the flows in the Fryingpan River 'since <br />May 1968. !he impacts of impoundment and flow regulation of the Fryingpan <br />River, as a result of Ruedi Reservoir, stand in stark contrast to the <br />impacts of Granby Reservoir and other transmountain diversions on the <br />Colorado River. Since October 1970 there have been only 2l months of 192 <br />(82% of the time) when a minimum flow of lOO cfs was not met. There have <br />been only 6 months out of 192 (a mere 3% of the time) when a minimum flow of <br />50 cfs has not been the mean monthly discharge in the Fryingpan'River. The <br />U.S. Bureau of Reclamation personnel that operate Ruedi Reservoir asa part <br />of the Fryingpan/Arkansas Project, have done a phenomenal job of maintaining <br />flows in the Fryingpan River to optimize the stream trout fishery that has <br />developed there over the past two decades. In my estimation, their record <br />of cooperation and concern for the best interests of the Fryingpan River <br />aquatic resource is unparalled in Colorado in the 20th Century. <br /> <br />~-, ;: ~ . <br /> <br />I 00002391 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.