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 />. <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />19 <br />To illustrate the impacts to Reach One when the Action(ALL) ruleset was triggered to <br />achieve the 18,600 cfs objective, Figure 14 shows a sample spring hydro graph in Reach One for <br />all three model runs. The data in this figure is from trace 37 in year 2015 from May through <br />July. The peak release that achieved all flow objectives except the 18,600 cfs objective had a <br />magnitude of 4600 cfs and a duration of about 16 days. Because the Yampa River triggered the <br />Action(ALL) ruleset to attempt to achieve the 18,600 cfs objective, the peak release magnitude <br />was reset by the Action(ALL) ruleset from 4600 cfs to 8600 cfs and the duration was decreased <br />to 14 days. This caused a significant bypass to occur in a year when achieving all other flow <br />objectives would not have required a bypass release. The historic year of this hydrology was <br />1970. For reference, the No Action model results and the historic spring releases that actually <br />occurred at Flaming Gorge Dam in 1970 are included on the figure. <br /> <br /> <br />Reach One <br /> <br />Example Flow Hydrograph - Reach I <br />Historical Year 1970, Trace 37 Year 2015 <br /> <br />10000 <br /> <br />8000 <br /> <br />No Action <br />Historical (1970) <br />All - I <br />All <br /> <br />~ 6000 <br />'" <br />'- <br />~ <br />~ <br />0 <br />u:: <br /> 4000 <br /> <br /> <br />2000 <br /> <br />rvPay-o I <br /> <br />Jul-01 <br /> <br />Aug-O I <br /> <br />Jun-O I <br /> <br />Date <br /> <br />Figure 15 shows the corresponding flows that occurred in Reach Two as a result of the <br />release hydro graphs illustrated in Figure 14. Figure 15 shows that although the Action(ALL-l) <br />model run did not achieve the 18,600 cfs objective, that 18,600 cfs was sustained for 11 days in <br />Reach Two during this year. The Yampa River flows decrease very rapidly from the peak. <br />Extending the duration of the 4600 cfs peak release would not have sustained flows in Reach <br />Two above 18,600 cfs for three additional days. <br />