My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7924
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7924
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:31 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 9:38:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7924
Author
Loar, J. M. and M. J. Sale.
Title
Analysis of Environmental Issues Related to Small-Scale Hydroelectric Development, V. Instream Flow Needs for Fishery Resources.
USFW Year
1981.
USFW - Doc Type
TM-7861, (contract no. W-7405-eng-26),
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
135
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
19 <br />Although the original guidelines include a recommendation that the <br />proposed flow requirements be supported by field data, such as <br />photographs of the proposed development site at critical flows, the <br />method has often been applied with no field work. <br />1 <br />Data required to apply a fixed percentage method such as the <br />Montana Method are easily obtained from the published stream gaging <br />records of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Good techniques are <br />available for extrapolating the MAF statistic upstream or downstream <br />from existing gaging stations or estimating MAF on ungaged watersheds <br />(e.g., Chow 1964, Linsley and Franzini 1972). However, because of the <br />skewed nature of stream flow events (floods are relatively rare in <br />occurrence but very signficant in terms of their effect on mean flow <br />values), a sound argument can be made for the fact that the median <br />flow statistic is a more appropriate measure of central tendencies in <br />hydrologic data than the mean flow. The median statistic has been <br />used in other approaches to instream flow assessment (Sect. 2.2). <br />2.2 Constant Yield <br />The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in Region 5 recently <br />issued guidelines (the New England Flow Recommendation Policy or <br />NEFRP) that establish a process for formulating minimum flow <br />recommendations by using a combination of the median flow and a <br />constant yield statistic to represent watershed hydrology (U.S. Fish <br />and Wildlife Service 1981, Knapp 1980). For unregulated streams with <br />a drainage area greater than 130 km2 (50 sq miles) and good historical <br />flow records (>25 years and t1d accuracy of gage), the median monthly <br />flow (MMF) serves as the datum for evaluation of instream flow needs <br />in the NEFRP. For streams that do not meet these criteria, a constant <br />yield factor, runoff per watershed area, was calculated for the entire <br />New England region and is applied to a specific site to estimate <br />actual flow conditions (Table 2-1). The instream flow recommendation <br />based on this policy is called the Aquatic Base Flow (ABF) and is
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.