Laserfiche WebLink
21 <br /> v <br /> 0 <br /> 0 <br /> 0 <br /> m <br /> 0 <br /> second at a stage of 6.36 on the gage. On June 2, 1935, the <br /> discharge that day was 6790 cubic feet per eeeon4, a little <br /> lees than 7000, but the gage height was 7.30, up one foot , <br /> 0 <br /> with slightly less discharge as compared to the other. Again <br /> on June 1, 1944,--that, by the way, is still unpublished be- <br /> cause our 1944 water year material is not yet published-- <br /> w <br /> the river carried 7760 pubic fest per second at a gage height <br />... of 6.40, which in a little below the gage height at which it <br /> carried 7240 bask in 1927. <br /> We have, instead of a progressive deterioration of the <br /> channel, a fluctuation in the stage discharge relationship <br /> for the reasons I have just described. <br /> CHAIRMAN KRAMER: May I ask, to be sure of the figures, <br /> what the gage height was at Garden City for the 1927 discharge <br /> measurement of 7240 second feet? <br /> MR.. KNAPP: 6.36. <br /> CHAIRMAN KRAMER: Then your last statement that the 1944 <br /> discharge,7760 cubic feet per second at a gage height of 6.40 <br /> gives an increased discharge at a slightly lower stage is not <br /> quite correct. <br /> MR. KNAPP: There was a fractional increase in gage: height <br /> but an appreciable increase in discharge. <br /> CHAIRMAN KRAMER: I wasn 't sure I understood the gage <br /> height figures correctly. <br />