Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Reconunend the most appropriate and reasonable flow(s) that can be <br />justified to provide protection and habitat for all aquatic resources. <br /> <br />RESULTS <br /> <br />Detailed field studies were conducted on 11 streams in 3 states <br />between 1964 and 1974 testing the Montana Method (Table 2). This <br />work involved physical, ch~mical, and biological analyses of 38 <br />different flows at 58 cross-sections on 196 stream miles, affecting <br />both coldwater and warmwater fisheries. Reports or publications on <br />6 study streams are available as indicated in Table 2. Numerous <br />black and white photos and 35 nun. slides were taken of all the flow <br />stages studied at each cross-section. The studies were all planned, <br />conducted, and analyzed with the help of state fisheries biologists. <br />These studies reveal that the condition of the aquatic habitat is <br />remarkably similar on most streams carrying the same portion of the <br />average flow. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Width, depth, and velocity are physical instream flow parameters <br />vital to the well-being of aquatic organisms and their habitat. <br />Sixteen-hundred measurements of these parameters for 48 different <br />flows on 10 of the streams cited in Table 2 show that they all increase <br />with flow and that changes are much greater at the lower levels of flow <br />(fig.l). Width, depth, and velocity all changed more rapidly from no <br />flow to a flow of 10% of the average, than at any point thereafter. <br />Ten percent (10%) of the average flow covered 60% of the substrates, <br />depths averaged 1 foot, and velocities averaged 3/4 foot per second. <br />Studies show that these are critical points or the lower limits for <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />7 <br />