My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Roaring Fork Stream Flow Survey (2)
CWCB
>
Watershed Protection
>
DayForward
>
Roaring Fork Stream Flow Survey (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2010 11:11:05 AM
Creation date
6/19/2008 1:50:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Watershed Protection
Document ID
hr_0006
County
Pitkin
Eagle
Garfield
Gunnison
Stream Name
Roaring Fork River
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Sub-Basin
Roaring Fork 14010004
Water Division
5
Title
Roaring Fork Watershed Stream Flow Survey Project Data Summary
Date
12/13/2004
Prepared For
CWCB
Prepared By
Roaring Fork Conservancy
Watershed Pro - Doc Type
Planning Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
However the real time stream gages in the basins do not commonly have a lengthy historical <br />record. The length of record for 12 of the real time gages is: 4, 6, 7, 15, 24, 25, 39 (2), 40, 41, 48, <br />61, and 96. Ruedi Reservoir and Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, which impact the Fryingpan River, <br />were operational around 1968 while diversions from the Roaring Fork River through the Twin <br />Lakes Tunnel began in 1935. Only the stream gages at Crlenwood, North Fork Fryingpan River <br />near Norrie and the Fryingpan River at Meredith have the suggested 20 years pre-impact record <br />to support 1HA. Additionally impacts on systems such as the Crystal River Basin did not occur at <br />one point in time. <br />The first step in using the IHA, is to identify the most appropriate indicators for each subbasin. <br />Olden and Poff (2003) recommended these IHA parameters for snowrnelt-dominated systems. <br />They suggested using them in conjunction with more intuitive index selection criteria based on <br />the particular ecological question of interest and in order of the largest absolute loadings on each <br />statistically significant principal component. <br />PC I (88.7% variation explained) <br />Code Hydrologic index <br />MA29 Variation in June flows <br />MA12 Mean January flows <br />MA13 Mean February flows <br />MA14 Mean March flows <br />MA23 Mean December flows <br />DLS Annual minima of 90-day means of daily discharge <br />duration <br />RAl Rise rate <br />next <br />RA3 Fall rate <br />I)e~nition <br />Coefficient of variation in June monthly flows <br />Magnitude of minimum annual flow of 90-day <br />Mean rate of + change inflow from one day to the <br />Mean rate of -change in flow from one day to the <br />next <br />DL1 Annual minima of 1-day mean of daily discharge Magnitude of minimum annual flow of 1-day duration <br />DL2 Annual minima of 3-day means of daily discharge Magnitude of minimum annual flow of 3-day <br />duration <br />DI14 Annual maxima of 30 day means of daily discharge Magnitude of maximum annual flow of 30-day <br />duration <br />Dx5 Annual maxima of 90 day means of daily discharge Magnitude of maximum annual flow of 90-day <br />duration <br />PC II (5.3% variation explained) <br />DL16 Low flow pulse duration mean duration of FLl <br />FLl Low flow pulse count-Number of annual occurrences during which the magnitude of flow remains below a <br />lower threshold. Hydrologic pulses are defined as those periods within a year in which the flow drops below the 25a` <br />percentile (low pulse) of all daily values for the time period. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.