Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br /> <br />1. A generalized skew factor was developed from fewer stations <br /> <br />and within a smaller radius than specified. This was done <br /> <br />oecause basin characteristic differences became too great <br /> <br />beyond those stations selected. <br /> <br />2. The study area is subject to a mixed flood population of <br /> <br />summer rain floods and spring snOl'lmelt floods. Data was not <br /> <br />available to analyse the populations separately therefore the <br /> <br />data was combined. The general ized skew coefficient was <br /> <br />developed from watersheds of similar flooding characteristics. <br /> <br />3. <br /> <br />In accordance with recommendations from the Colorado ~ater <br /> <br />Conservation Board, Coordinating agency for flood studies, two <br /> <br />possible high outl iers were kept in the systematic record of <br /> <br />the primary station. This \vas in I ieu of treating them as <br /> <br />historical events in computing station statistics. The net <br /> <br />result was somewhat higher flows for specified frequencies. <br /> <br />Three stream9age stations were available in the general vicinity of the <br /> <br />study area on the San Juan River. One is located at Pagosa Springs, <br /> <br />drainage area of 298 square miles. The other two are located each on a <br /> <br />major fork of the River above the study area, drainage areas of 86.9 <br /> <br />square miles and 87.9 square miles. <br /> <br />After computing the appropriate station statistics for each station <br /> <br />using the Log Pearson II I Distribution and previously discussed generalized <br /> <br />~. ....' <br /> <br />.c..' <br /> <br />~' <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />I~ <br /> <br />, "! <br /> <br />[ <br />~' . <br />. . <br /> <br />~ .. <br /> <br />~ <br />L <br />~.'. <br />~~ <br /> <br />'. . <br /> <br />.' "" <br /> <br />;u..~ <br /> <br />, . <br /> <br />-";,. <br /> <br />.. <br />, <br /> <br />- <br />.' <br />