My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8279
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
8279
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:34 PM
Creation date
6/1/2009 11:37:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
8279
Author
Brown and Caldwell.
Title
Phase 1 Coordinated Facilities Water Availability Study for the Endangered Fishes of the Upper Colorado River.
USFW Year
2000.
USFW - Doc Type
\
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
110
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 />short list of alternatives for further consideration. The extended baseline hydrology will then be <br />used to determine the sensitivity of the short list alternatives to the hydrology. <br />2.3.3 Baseline Conditions <br />For purposes of determining the contribution of each alternative toward the 20,000, acre-feet, the <br />baseline condition will be the StateMod C1 Scenario, with the RIPRAP projects and without the <br />60,000 acre-feet or 120,000 acre-feet of new depletions, as detailed in Appendix D of the PBO. <br />The StateMod C1 Scenario has the following components of RIPRAP flows incorporated into the <br />scenario: <br />• 5,000 acre-feet per year from Ruedi Reservoir, <br />• 5,000 acre-feet in 4 out of 5 years from Ruedi Reservoir, <br />10,825 acre-feet per year from Ruedi Reservoir under long-term lease, <br />10,825 acre-feet per year on a permanent basis divided equally between east slope and <br />west slope water users (presently Williams Fork and Wolford Mountain Reservoirs), <br />• 6,000 acre-feet per year from Wolford Mountain Reservoir, <br />• Up to 28,400 acre-feet per year of water resulting from construction of improved water <br />management features for the Grand Valley Water Management Project. <br />CROP will not be included in the baseline hydrology to be used in Phase 2. At the conclusion of <br />investigating each of the alternatives to be analyzed in Phase 2, the alternative will be subjected <br />to necessary and appropriate sensitivity analysis to determine if CROP is likely to affect the <br />feasibility of the specific alternative. <br />Sensitivity analysis will be used in a similar fashion with respect to the 120,000 acre-feet per <br />year of future depletions. At the conclusion of investigating each of the alternatives in Phase 2, <br />the alternative will be subjected to necessary and appropriate sensitivity analysis to determine if <br />feasibility of the alternative is affected by including the 120,000 acre-feet per year of future <br />depletions in the baseline hydrology. <br />2.3.4 Flow Targets <br />As indicated in (1) a memo from the Service (Maddux, February 2, 1999), (2) a meeting with the <br />Service (April 1, 1999) and (3) the PBO (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1999, pg. 11), the <br />Service is first and foremost interested in augmenting the peak of the spring runoff hydrograph <br />with an additional 20,000 acre-feet of water on an average annual basis. The Service's priority is <br />to increase spring peak flows when the hydrograph peak is expected to be in the range of 12,900 <br />to 26,600 cfs at the head of the 15-Mile Reach or approximately 29,000 cfs at the Cameo USGS <br />gage (Coordinated Reservoir Operations Group, 1999 and personal communication from George <br />p:\data\gen\0cwcb\18133\report\phase-1\chap-2.doc 2-8 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />i <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.