My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD03331
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
FLOOD03331
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 6:26:58 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 11:40:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Gunnison
Community
Uncompahgre Valley
Basin
Gunnison
Title
Uncompahgre Valley Reclamation Project - Hydropower - Part 3 - Environmental Impact Statement DRAFT
Date
4/19/1989
Floodplain - Doc Type
Project
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
331
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 />SUMMARY <br /> <br />September flows would be 897 ft'/s for alternative A, 730 ft'/s <br />for B, 637 ft'/s for C, 730 ft'/s for E, and 730 ft'/s for F. <br />Minimum streamflows would be 300 ft'/s for all alternatives, but <br />the frequency of 300 ft'ls flowsw.oulcl increase significantly with <br />development alternatives. <br /> <br />A monitoring system would be operated to assure maintenance of <br />instream flows as well as protection of irrigation supplies. In <br />addition under alternative F, additional flows would be bypassed <br />to the Gunnison River during winter operations if adverse icing <br />conditions develop. AlternativeF also would release up to <br />1,000 acre-feet of additional flow to the Uncompahgre River via <br />the South Canal during the summer. <br /> <br />The operation of the facility would result in a decrease in <br />Uncompahgre River flows in some reaches and increases in other <br />reaches. Streamflows in the Uncompahgre River entering Montrose <br />would be reduced by 75 percent for all of the development <br />alternatives. Streamflows in the Uncompahgre River downstream <br />from the proposed tailrace would be increased by 339 percent for <br />alternative B, 364 percent for alternative C, 318 percent for <br />alternative E, and 336 percent for alternative F. <br /> <br />Diversions from the Gunnison River would be curtailed under all <br />alternatives, including no~action, during periods of flooding <br />along the Uncompahgre River. Under the development alternatives, <br />local flooding and severe local erosion would occur in case of <br />catastrophic penstock failure. <br /> <br />Irriqation <br /> <br />. <br />Operation of the development alternatives would not affect the <br />amount of water diverted for irrigation use within the study <br />area, including private irrigation diversions as well as the <br />UVRP. The Montrose and Delta Canal and the Loutzenhizer Canal <br />would recerve the majority of their water supply from the <br />Uncompahgre River with development. Under the no-action <br />alternative, about 59 percent of the water supplies delivered to <br />these canals would be derived Lrom the Gunnison River. Under any <br />of the development alternatives, this figure would be reduced to <br />about 35 percent. Senior water rights for private irrigation <br />diversions along the Gunnison and Uncompahgre Rivers would <br />continue to be honored.' <br /> <br />River Morphology <br /> <br />Without development, the Gunnison River between the North Fork <br />confluence and Delta would be expected to become narrower and <br /> <br />S - 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.