Laserfiche WebLink
<br />On the other hand, large releases modeled to meet the NPS desired peak flows would result in <br />recommended fish peak flows being met more frequently at the Whitewater gage because of the large <br />volume of water needed for the NPS peaks. Operating to meet NPS desired peaks met at least 90 percent <br />of the endangered fish peaks about 60 percent of the time. <br /> <br />The following table compares model runs to meet both the NPS desired flows and the endangered fish <br />flow recommendations. <br /> <br />Endangered Fish Flow Recommendations and NPS Desired Flow Comparison <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />90% of the NPS Peak 4% 19% 50% <br />Met <br />90% of Endangered Fish 19% 58% 62% <br />Peaks Met <br />100% of Required Flow 81% 38% 100% <br />90% of Required Flow 89% 65% 100% <br />80% of Required Flow 96% 77% 100% <br />>95% of Desired Base 90% 97% 89% <br />Flow <br />>80% of Desired Base 96% 99% 94% <br />Flow <br />Occurrences when Base 87% 93% 84% <br />Flow Demand> 1000 cfs <br /> <br />*Provides a May peak with the same limitations as FWS Run C. <br /> <br />It should be noted that operating to meet the desired tlows for both the NPS and the endangered fish will <br />have significant negative effects on other resources. For example, operating to meet the NPS desired <br />hydro graph will impact hydrpower, downstream fisheries and flooding at Delta, while operating to meet <br />endangered fish flow recommendations will have greater impacts on resources dependent on reservoir <br />levels such as the State of Colorado Compact entitlement, reservoir fisheries, and recreation. <br /> <br />15 <br />