Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.' <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />c) the rest of the time (50%) maintain peak flows equal to or exceeding 22,000 cfs <br />(minimal recruitment peak). <br />· Within the 15-mile reach provide peak flows as given in Table 1. <br /> <br />Table 1. Recommendations for spring flows (in cfs) in the 15-mile reach (from Osmundson and <br />Kaeding 1991). <br /> <br /> Mean monthly dischar~e <br />Frequency <br />(percent years) Peak day April May June <br />~25% > 23,500 > 3,900 > 12,900 > 16,300 <br />~ 25% 20,500 - 23,500 3,200 - 3,900 10,800 - 12,900 12,800 - 16,200 <br />~50% 14,800 - 20,500 2,400 - 3,200 8,300 - 10,800 10,000 - 12,800 <br /> <br />· Maintain July - September flows from 700 - 1,200 cfs on nonnal or wet years and 600 <br /> <br />cfs minimum on dry years within the 15-mile reach. <br />· Maintain current (1954 - 1989) base (winter) and transition (October and March) flows <br />(ca 1,000 - 2,000 cfs) in the 15-mile reach. <br /> <br />Problems with the How Recommendations of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service <br /> <br />Yampa River <br /> <br />Recommendations made for the Yampa River specify maintenance of historical flows. This <br />recommendation apparently was determined solely on the rationale that natural flows would foster <br />continued spawning success by squawfish and increase the likelihood that remaining razorback <br />sucker and humpback chub would be protected. <br />The Yampa River clearly is a critical habitat for the endangered fishes. Recruitment of <br />populations in the Green River may depend upon spawning sites in Yampa Canyon. Most <br />importantly, the Yampa River is the only reasonably pristine tributary remaining in the Upper <br />Colorado River Basin. Hence, I view it as a "control" for evaluating the success or failure of interim <br />flows adopted on the regulated reach, which will be a critical assessment to be made in the future. <br /> <br />55 <br />