BOARD01665

• Board Meeting Date: 3/22/2005
• Description: ISF Section - Table Rock Properties, LLC ‎(Case No. 5-03CW331)‎ - Injury with Mitigation Proposal
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

,

"

if it would assist in developing a reasonable boundary for flow sharing on this reach of stream.
Suggested flows that meet the 2 00 (winter) and 3 of3 (summer) criteria test used to set ISF
recommendations were identified from each effort available to be included in this report. Results
can be viewed in Table 3 and sampling results completed by QOR in 2004 can be viewed in
Appendix m.

e

Table 3. Results of R2 Cross evaluations 1985 vs 2002 VI 2004

6.34 cIs
2J.5cft
2.9 ciS
6.0 ciS
3.1 ciS
7.1 ciS
5.1 cft
804 cft
6.2 cIs
6.5 cls*
22 cls*
*not use/lble cross section.
Review of these effurts compIeted over the period of record has produced a reasonable boundary
for flow sharing that would continue to protect the biota of the stream to a reasonable degree
below the established 10 cfS. Of particular importance is the results of cross sections completed
after the restoration as this effurt identifies the "after restoration" recommended flows that afford
protection using the R2Cross methodology. Additiooally, it is hydrologically reasonable to
approach the flow sharing agreement utilizing a strati1ication of the stream based on the
contribution ofEgeria Creek. This agreement results in one definition of flow sharing above
Egeria Creek and a difibent one below Egeria Creek. Flow sharing criteria above Egeria Creek
could utilize a protection flow that is lower than those needed below Egeria Creek.

1985 Upper

Lower

2002 Upper

Lower

2004 Upper

Upper

Lower

.

Lower
Lower

2/3 (0.4'd. 80";"WP,VO.8')
3/3 (0.6'd. 88% WP, VI')
2/3
3/3
2/3
3/3 (no veL=l' produced)
2/3
3/3
2/3
3/3
2/3
3/3
2/3
3/3
2/3=3/3
2/3
3/3

5.62 ciS
12.68 ciS
6.34 cIs
6.34 cIs
6.12 ciS

E"amining the R2Cross effurts completed throughout the period of record below Egeria Creek
(lower) indicates that a flow less than 10 ciS is estimated 5 out of 5 times for winter flows (2 00
criteria met) and 3 out of5 times for summer flows (3 of3 criteria met). Resuhs indicate that a
flow of 6.0-6.5 cfS is most often estimated to be capable of protecting the biota in the stream to a
reasonable degree. A result approximately in this range or lower is prechcted 4 out of 4 times for
winter flows and 2 out of 4 times for summer flows. A flow-sharing agreement that allows flows
in the stream below the Ranch's diversion points at levels less than 6 ciS but generally not less than
5 ciS is supported by the dramatic increase in trout habitat abundance and trout habitat quality, the
fiIct that each afJected reach is within close proximity of an unaffected reach that can provide

e