My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD10363 (2)
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
10001-11000
>
FLOOD10363 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2009 12:49:17 PM
Creation date
7/13/2007 9:28:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Gunnison
Community
Gunnison County
Stream Name
East River, Cement Creek, Alkali Creek, Ohio Creek
Title
Gunnison County Flood Hydrology, Contract # W99-D-0018 Final Report
Date
11/1/2004
Prepared For
US Army Corps of Engineers, CWCB and Gunnison County
Prepared By
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Floodplain - Doc Type
Floodplain Report/Masterplan
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
131
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 />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 />The 1 percent chance exceedence flow for the Gunnison River from Ohio Creek to Tomichi Creek, with a <br />drainage area of 1,012 square miles, is 10,200 cfs; whereas the 1 percent chance exceedence flow for <br />Tomichi Creek, with a drainage area of 1,061 square miles is significantly less at 2,540 cfs. The large <br />difference in flow values is due to the differences in topography between the two contributing watersheds. <br />The contributing watershed to the Gunnison River reach is dominated by rugged, mountainous terrain <br />subject to large amounts of snowfall. The watershed of T omichi Creek is primarily a high mountain valley <br />area, and while it still receives snowfall, the volume is significantly less than that of the Gunnison River <br />reach watershed. The lower elevation areas have higher temperatures and longer snowmelt runoff period <br />than the upper watersheds, which will hold snow longer and will have more rapid snowmelt runoff periods. <br />Both factors contribute to the large difference in the 1 percent chance exceedence flows for the two <br />reaches. <br /> <br />The results from the flood frequency analyses for the study reaches indicate logical trends in values that <br />increase in the downstream direction. The resulting flood flows for each reach are presented in Table 7.2. <br />This study provides the necessary flood flows to complete the hydraulic analyses for the FEMA FIS study <br />along each of the eight reaches for the associated flood events. <br /> <br />57 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.