My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9605
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9605
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:36 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 3:22:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9605
Author
Schmidt, J. C. and e. al.
Title
Flow Recommendations for the White River, Utah-Colorado Draft Report.
USFW Year
2002.
USFW - Doc Type
Logan, UT.
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
<br />Flood Frequency Analysis <br /> <br /> <br />The magnitude of flooding on the White River has decreased significantly since <br /> <br /> <br />the mid-1960s (Figure A-7). The average peak flood at the Watson gage between 1923 <br /> <br /> <br />and 1965 was 4,300 cfs. The average peak flood magnitude between 1965 and the <br /> <br />construction of Taylor Draw Dam in 1984 was 3,470 cfs. After the completion of the <br /> <br /> <br />dam, peak floods have changed little. The average peak flood for the period between <br /> <br /> <br />completion of dam in 1984 and 1997 was 3,437 cfs. Peak floods from these three time <br /> <br /> <br />periods were compared using a series oft-tests. Test results (Table A-I) show that at a <br /> <br /> <br />95% confidence interval, the average peak flows between 1923 and 1964 are <br /> <br /> <br />significantly different from peaks both before (1965 and 1983) and after the completion <br /> <br /> <br />of Taylor Draw Dam (1984 and 1997). The average peak flows for the two time periods <br /> <br />since 1965 are not significantly different. Thus, the decreased peak flow magnitudes <br /> <br />which have occurred since the mid-1960s were not due to the construction of Taylor <br /> <br />Draw Dam because the decrease occurred before the dam was built. Regional climate <br /> <br />changes may be responsible for this shift. <br /> <br />Partial-duration series analyses for these same three time periods yields a slightly <br /> <br />different perspective about the differences among these periods. The magnitude of high <br /> <br />recurrence floods (1.25 - 2 year recurrence interval) has decreased in the post-Taylor <br /> <br />Draw Dam period, while the magnitude of larger floods (5 - 10 year recurrence interval) <br /> <br /> <br />may have increased (Figure A-8) (Table A-2). This may be due to the small storage <br /> <br /> <br />capacity of Kenney Reservoir, and also to climatic changes during the period after <br /> <br /> <br />completion of the dam. The small reservoir can store a portion of the inflow of small <br /> <br />floods, but cannot control larger magnitude floods. <br />18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.