Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Comparison of natural, historic and future flows in the Yampa River at <br />Maybell using the Colorado River Decision Support System (CRDSS) <br /> <br />Background <br /> <br />There have been numerous hydrologic analyses of the Yampa River Basin since the inception of <br />the Recovery Implementation Program for the Endangered Fishes ofthe Upper Colorado River <br />Basin (Recovery Program). These analyses have relied on available records and monthly time- <br />step computer models, such as the Colorado River Decision Support System (CRDSS) developed <br />and operated by the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB). <br /> <br />The CRDSS uses a baseline of historical hydrologic and atmospheric conditions on which an <br />overlay of simulated future water supply and demand conditions can be analyzed and compared. <br />The CRDSS period of record for the Yampa River is water-years 1975-1991 (October 1, 1974- <br />September 30, 1991). Although 17 years is a relatively brief period, it includes several low- <br />water years representing different historical conditions; these years are the focus of this analysis. <br /> <br />No daily hydrologic models exist or are contemplated in the near future for the Yampa River <br />Basin. If a daily model were developed, much of the data for historic diversions, return flows, <br />etc. would have to be synthesized. Regardless of the level of "resolution" , the output of any <br />hydrologic model is only one tool to assist decision-makers in reconciling competing demands <br />for water. The CRDSS relies upon the past to predict what is likely to occur in the future. While <br />it provides a quantitative estimate of water needs, we cannot rely on it for day-to-day operational <br />flow management decisions. <br /> <br />The CRDSS can predict discharge at a variety of nodes or discrete points in the basin. For the <br />purposes of this modeling exercise, two nodes were selected: the USGS gage near Maybell, <br />Colorado, at rivermile 85.8, and immediately above the Maybell Canal Diversion, at about <br />rivermile 89.1. The gage at Maybell has been in continuous operation since May 1, 1916, with <br />the longest continuous record and the best rating section for low-flow conditions of any gage in <br />the lower Yampa River Basin. By comparison, the gage at Deerlodge Park had only 12 years of <br />record prior its relocation in 1997. The old gage site was frequently exposed to accumulations <br />of fine sediment which compromised the reliability of its low.;flow record. <br /> <br />The Maybell gage record is not entirely representative of the overall flow conditions in the lower <br />Yampa River, because it is only about 3 rivermiles below the diversion structure for the Maybell <br />Canal. The Maybell Canal has significant water rights that allows diversion of most of the river <br />during very dry conditions. On September 12, 1994, for example, Maybell Canal diverted 25 <br />cubic feet per second (cfs) while the gage measured less than 8 cfs. Return flows from lands <br />irrigated by the Maybell Canal gradually increase stream flows downstream from the Maybell <br />gage. Therefore, during the irrigation season, river reaches upstream from the diversion and <br />downstream from the town of Maybell generally have greater flows than those indicated at the <br />gage. However, no gage records are available in this reach to reliably estimate daily flows. <br />Above the Maybell Canal, flows can be synthesized by combining gage records from the Yampa <br />River at Craig and the Williams Fork at its confluence with the Yampa near Hamilton, Colorado. <br />However, these two gages have been in operation only since 1984 and provide a daily record for <br />less than half of the current 17 -year CRDSS period of record. Another means of synthesizing <br /> <br />Appendix B 1 <br />