Laserfiche WebLink
Figure 12 shows a representative scatter plot of historic measured end-of--month contents versus <br />Previous CRDSS and Enhanced analysis results. As shown, and reinforced in Table 2, the <br />Enhanced analysis predicts reservoir interactions that are representative of measured conditions. <br />Reservoir calibration does not appear to be better or worse during varying hydrologic conditions. <br />Figure 12 <br />Yamcolo Reservoir <br />Gaged versus Simulated EOM Content (1980-1996) <br />10000 <br />N <br />N <br />y 8000 <br />v <br />a <br />r <br />~ 6000 <br />r <br />O <br />U <br />~ 4000 <br />w <br />N <br />r <br />~ 2000 <br />V/ <br />CRDSS vs Gaged Current vs Gaged <br />y = 0.98x y = 0.98x <br />RZ = 0.97 RZ = 0.97 + <br />~~ <br />~ '^ <br />ri* i i <br />^ ^ <br />^ <br />2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 <br />Gaged EOM Contents <br />• Previous CRDSS vs Gaged ^ Enhanced versus Gaged <br />Table 2 <br />Reservoir Calibration Results -Historic Model <br /> Previous CRDSS Results Enhanced Results <br />Reservoir % Difference RZ % Difference RZ <br />Stagecoach Reservoir 7 % 0.92 14 % 0.84 <br />Yamcolo Reservoir 2 % 0.97 2 % 0.97 <br />Steamboat Reservoir 2 % 0.88 2 % 0.88 <br />Elkhead Reservoir 1 % 0.98 2 % 0.95 <br />Difference = (measured -predicted)/measured <br />1976-1996 Crop Consumptive Use Comparison <br />The basin-wide crop consumptive use, estimated by the CRDSS Yampa River Basin <br />consumptive use StateCU analysis, was compared to the StateMod consumptive use estimates <br />for crop irrigation structures only. Note that consumptive use of irrigation structures in <br />Wyoming and non-irrigation consumptive use in the basin was not included in the StateCU <br />analysis, therefore has been subtracted from the StateMod consumptive use estimates for this <br />VariableEff Taskl-5 13 of 17 November 5, 2001 <br />