Laserfiche WebLink
with base flows of 98 cfs for the Little Snake and 297 cfs for the Yampa <br />into the same sediment budget program which produced the historical data in <br />Tabl a 4. The summary resul is are shown in Tabl e 5 and al I the resul is are. <br />presented in Appendix B. <br />The exceedance hydrographs for each tributary are evaluated one at time <br />with the prescribed base flow (base flow or exceedance discharge whichever <br />is greater is used for that daily discharge) and these constitute the <br />minimum streamflow hydrograph In this analysis. A comparison is made <br />between the minimum streamflow hydrograph and the historic discharge on a <br />daily basis for each year on record and the smal I er val ue is used In the <br />analysis. This comparison Is made for the discharge at Mathers Hole (the <br />combined flow for the Little Snake and Yampa Rivers). The sediment load <br />predictions are then performed based on the f anal discharge val ues at <br />Maybel I, Lily, and Mathers Hol e. <br />The sediment budget array in Table 5 demonstrates that a sediment <br />balance or equi I ibrium in the canyon w it I only be maintained if the <br />streamf I ow s in each tributary are reduced by equal proportions. This table <br />also shows that if the Little Snake River flow remains essential ly <br />undepleted, the flows in the Yampa should not be reduced if the sediment <br />equilibrium is to be maintained. Within the range of error in the <br />measurements and the error introduced In this analysis some minor depletion <br />of the Yampa River as discussed later would not adversely effect the system. <br />To progress further with the sediment budget analysis, the NPS minimum <br />streamflow hydrograph (O'Brien, 1984) is tested assuming that the flows in <br />the Little Snake River are depleted according to criteria derived from Table <br />4 of the USFWS Stagecoach Biological Opinion (1986) This criteria <br />postulates monthly target flows for wet, dry and average years and results <br />in a minor depletion of the average annual volume of the Little Snake of <br />29,000 AF (6 percent). The concepts of a dry or drought year and a wet year <br />in the hydrologic record of a given river Is subject to interpretation. To <br />quantify these delineations for application of the FWS flow targets for the <br />Little Snake, the annual volume for the period of record was statistically. <br />analyzed for the combined f lows of the Yampa and Little Snake Rivers. Based <br />on the statistics, flows were divided into three categories using one-half <br />the standard deviation to identify wet, average and dry years: <br />Wet Years (18) > 1,800,000 AF <br />Average Years (25) 1,300,000 AF < Volume < 1,800,000 AF <br />Dry Years (21) < 1,300,000 AF <br />Af ter the minor depletions are subtracted from the Little Snake <br />historic flows, a comparison of the NPS minimum streamfIow (with an <br />alternative 340 cfs base flow) and historic flaw is made on a daily basis <br />and whichever discharge is less is assigned as the minimum hydrograph for <br />Mathers Hole. If this Mathers Hole minimum hydrograph is less than the <br />historic hydrograph, the difference is charged as a depletion from the Yampa <br />river at Maybel I, subject to a 297 cfs base flow at Maybel I. <br />14