Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />1 '7 <br />Flow Durations (May - July) <br />Reach 2 <br />- -- <br />50000 __ I - - No Action 4 Week Flow <br />- Historic 4 Week Flow (71 -91 ) <br />40000 - Action 4 Week Flow <br />_ 10000 - <br />'l. <br />J <br />i X0000 <br />10000 <br />0 <br />0 17c-- -----20c7, - 4017c -- --- 60`o 100`/r <br />Percent Exceeded <br />Reach Two Base Flow Release Results <br />Figure 19 shows the distribution of baseflows that occurred in reach Two under the Action <br />and No Action alternatives. Baseflows are noticeably decreased under the Action alternative <br />especially in wetter years. For reference, the distribution of pre-dam (1946 to 1961) baseflows <br />and the distribution of baseflows during the period from 1971 through 1991 are included in the <br />figure. The period from 1946 through 1961 does include a significant dry cycle for the Upper <br />Green River Basin but these two distributions of historic Reach Two flows give some perspective <br />to the difference between the Action and No Action alternative baseflows. <br />Figure 19 Exceedance Percentage Flows for Reach Two Flows During Base Flow Period