Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OG1714 <br /> <br />Nlethod <br /> <br />During the Test, nine river gaging locations were monitored . d <br />7-ID;..,1.o CW~IC k ~ Oo.lj)> I <br />and stream flow measurements collected over a three-oay j;;41W ".,f:+.JL.. <br />p,eriod. The river, canal diversions, and canal flows at various <br />p.oints and wasteways were also measured. When necessary, <br />now data were collected through interviews with water users. <br />Attachment A provides a detailed description of flow <br />measurements, analysis, and results. <br /> <br />WATER QUALITY <br /> <br />C-utcome <br /> <br />T,est results found that most water quality parameters did not <br />exceed State standards. For example, results indicate that no <br />exceedences were noted for the irrigation, livestock, and <br />wildlife habitat standards and no parameters exceeded the <br />acute fishery standards. Municipal and industrial water <br />s'upply and secondary contact uses do not have any <br />associated standards. <br /> <br />However, several parameters were noted to exceed the <br />chronic fishery and river segment standards. For example, <br />the high quality coldwater fishery standard from Navajo Dam <br />to the Highway 64 bridge at Blanco, NM, was exceeded for <br />the parameters total organic carbon and conductivity. In <br />addition, fecal coliform samples exceeded the standard at the <br />sites above the Highway 44 bridge in Bloomfield and at the <br /> <br />-8- <br /> <br />Summer Low Flow Report - November 2001 <br />