My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9385
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9385
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:35 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 4:46:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9385
Author
Hawkins, J.
Title
Responses by Flaming Gorge Technical Integration Team to April 4, 2000, Minority Report from John Hawkins
USFW Year
2000.
USFW - Doc Type
Flow and Temperature Recommendations for Endangered Fishes in the Green River Downstream of Flaming Gorge Dam (hereafter the Flow Report.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
112
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 />had suggested that over the long term the river may not have been in equilibrium <br />pre-Flaming Gorge. From his analysis of post-reservoir aerial photos, Lyons et al. <br />(1992) concluded that channel narrowing was essentially complete by 1974. This <br />statement conflicted with Andrews conclusions that adjustment of the channel <br />width downstream of the Jensen gage was incomplete in 1978. The overall <br />conclusion drawn by Lyons et al. (1992) was that channel changes initiated by the <br />construction of Flaming Gorge Dam occurred soon after operation of the reservoir <br />began. Recent work indicates that channel narrowing is continuing in this reach <br />(FLO 1996). <br /> <br />Stanford (1994) introduced a few concepts to guide instream flow studies. <br />He indicated that the relationship between channel flows and flooded bottomlands <br />should be assessed through the response of the system to a range of discharges <br />and sediment loads. Flooded bottomlands should not be evaluated with a simple <br />stage-area relationship. Flushing flows are needed to scour sediment and <br />vegetation from low velocity habitats. Conversely, flushing flows may actually <br />degrade the channel and further reduce flood frequency owing to reduced <br />sediment loads in the system. If peak flows are unsuccessful in creating diverse <br />habitat and complex channel features that passively retain drifting larvae, then the <br />larvae can be swept out of the nursery habitat by the high flows. Occasional <br />flows approaching the flood of record are required to reform and integrate the full <br />suite of channel and floodplain features. Stanford stated that peak flows should <br />approximate the range and frequency of pre-reservoir events. Another <br />recommendation by Stanford was that no further depletion of flows delivering <br />water to the Yampa Canyon should occur suggesting no future depletion of Little <br />Snake River flows would be acceptable. <br /> <br />44 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.