Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br />M.-.~_~__~.------"'_ <br /> <br />-'. +.__:....,_._._..-..~--_._~~..... <br /> <br />~~ .,~- """"- . --.. <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />A frequency analysis of streamgage records was made in accordance with <br />Water Resources Council Bulletin 17, see included computation sheets. <br />The values were compared with data from Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />Technical Manual No.1. Technical Manual No.1 discharges are slightly <br />higher, however considering it accounts for affects of mixed population,~ <br />was selected for use in the study. See percent Chance vs discharge Chart <br />and letter from the Water Conservation Board. <br />This procedure provided necessary peak discharge frequency values at the <br />streamgage site. Values at other locations along the stream were determined <br />from a procedure in Colorado Water Conservation Board Technical Manual <br />No. I, pg. 4 - Flood Information Near Gage Sites on the Same Stream. <br />Subsequently a drainage area vs peak discharge curve (figure 1) was <br />developed for convenience and to maintain consistency in selecting flows <br />at several selected locations. <br /> <br /> <br />An overflow channel comes into operation at a location 1.1 mile down- <br />stream from the North Fork confluence. At this point out of bank flows <br />from the main channel continue in a Easterly direction following several <br />secondary channels. The main channel heads in a Northeasterly direction. <br />Discharge values continuing in the main channel remain nearly the same <br />for all discharge-frequency values equal to or greater than the capacity <br />of the channel, approximately 600 c.f.s. <br /> <br />Another division of flow occurs along the secondary channels at a point <br /> <br /> <br />about 1500 feet downstream from the first location. Consequently flood <br />