My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Estimating Additional Water Yield from Changes in Management
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
2001-3000
>
Estimating Additional Water Yield from Changes in Management
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:41:08 PM
Creation date
7/22/2009 12:50:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8461.250
Description
Water Issues
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
5/12/2000
Author
Charles A. Troendle, James M. Nankervis
Title
Estimating Additional Water Yield from Changes in Management
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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
Cumulatively, approximately 1$ percent of the basal area has been removed <br />from the Deadhorse Creek rvatershed above the main streamgage, as a. result <br />of the three treatments. A.lthough significant increases in flow havi- been <br />documented to occur at the le;vel of the individual sub-basins, significant <br />changes in flow cannot be d.etected at the main streamgage (figure 7). <br />Noted earlier, the flow inc;rease observed to have occurred incrementally <br />from the North Fork, Upper 33asin, and North Slope (Unit 8) portions of <br />Deadhorse Creek were noi:, in aggregate, detectable a few hundred. yards <br />downstream at the mouth oi.' the main watershed. As watershed size <br />increases, the changes in flow cjocumented to occur at the point of impact, or <br />on-site, become less detectable. The argument cannot be made that the <br />observed increases in flow are not present downstream, but their presence is <br />difficult to document. <br />so <br />50 <br />? <br />U <br />.? <br />? 40 <br />cz <br />? <br />? 30 <br />0 <br />s <br />-n <br />? 20 <br />Ca <br />3 <br />w 10 <br />0 <br />Figure 7. Regression line deinonstrating the relationship between streamflow from <br />Deadhorse Main plotted ove:r stre;amflow from the control watershed, East St. Louis <br />Creek. Pre- and post- harvest data are presented. <br />In the early 1980's, pi•elirninary results from the Deadhorse Creek <br />Watershed study rekindlecl studies exploring the effect of forest vegetation <br />on snow pack accumulatnon. At least two processes contribute to this <br />increase in snow pack within cut stands. Wilm and Dunford (1948) <br />attributed the increase to a. reciuction in evaporation of snow intercepted by <br />the tree crowns. Mea:sure;ments by Goodell (1959) supported this <br />conclusion. However, when (limited) snow pack measurements on the Fool <br />Creek watershed demonstrateci no net increase in peak water equivalent after <br /> <br />?. <br />10 20 30 40 50 60 <br />Flow East St. Louis Creek (cm)
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.