My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP12515
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
WSP12515
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:16:24 PM
Creation date
7/24/2007 2:54:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.102.01.H
Description
Colorado River - Water Projects - Aspinall Storage Unit - General - Operation Studies
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
8/1/2003
Author
LaGory - Tomasko - Hayse
Title
Evaluating the Effects of Aspinall Unit Release Strategies on Endangered Fish Habitat in the Lower Gunnison River - Draft - 08-01-03
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.
/
70
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 />OOu3~1 <br /> <br />Draft - Do Not Cite <br /> <br />17 <br /> <br />August 2003 <br /> <br />Pitlick et al. (999) observed that during the period of 1978 through 1997, sediment in k <br />the lo'Wp.T Glmnison River was in approximate equilibrium. i.e.. the amOlmt of sediment <br />- <br /> <br />transported intQ thE;; tiyer 'W3S f1PllIoxim3tp.ly the same as that transported out of the river. On the <br />~ - <br /> <br />b~is of this observatioJh. Pitlick et al. (1999) recommended that the JTlp.an r1nmtion of flows <br />above ~ese thresholds dllring tbe-.J.9;l.8..thmugb.J.2.2LperioQ. should be achif'ved in the futme to <br />m~ existing c.onr1jti~ In imprQ:X~ ~Q!}S,Jg\a' ~m1J)~~d t1)at th~ more r~t <br />- <br /> <br />1993 through 1997 pen.tUX JJ~ p11miclced <br />..l ~ <br /> <br />2.4.2 Milhous Flow Recommendations <br /> <br />Millious (1998) identified specific river discharges needed to promote suitable habitat for <br />endangered aquatic species. These flows are linked to hydraulic components of the river <br />(e.g., maximum size of the sediment to be moved) and biological components of the aquatic <br />species. Milhous determined the hydraulic conditions needed to remove and transport sediment <br />through the river channel and to maintain the channel morphology required to meet the needs of <br />the fish. <br /> <br />Millious's flow recommendations were developed using data collected in a 1.2 mile reach <br />called ths: Dominguez Flats located between the Delta and Grand Junction gages. Milhous's <br />recommendations were divided into two categories: a maintenance flow to move small sized <br />particles (0.5 mm) through the system as ~lJ lQLUl and ,Dushing- flows to removp. CWU:S~ s~ <br />.!.om riffles where the CQlorqgo 12.ikeJ1!iIp1ow ~~wns. to remove fines and sands from the river in <br />general, to remove gravel from pools, and to scour side channels. Milhous recommended the <br />following flow thresholds: <br /> <br />Maintenance flow <br />. 954 cfs to keep 0.5 mm particles in suspension as wash load <br /> <br />Flushingflows <br />. 7,420 cfs to scour side channels, <br />. 12,500 cfs to remove sand and fines from the river, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.