Laserfiche WebLink
<br />j <br />, <br /> <br />Executive Summary <br /> <br />water rights, Le. the Maybell Canal and the proposed Juniper Canyon instream flow right, to <br />allow additional upstream junior diversions. The amount of water that could be exchanged out <br />of the Williams Fork Reservoir was limited in the model by imposing a minimum instream <br />flow to prevent the Yampa River from being dried up in some occupied habitat reaches <br />(specifically the mainstem above the Williams Fork) during the months of August and <br />September. The amount of this minimum instream flow constraint was suggested by the <br />Service and represented in the model as 150 cfs in August and 110 cfs in September. There <br />were no such constraints on exchange potential in other months or for other reaches. <br /> <br />Shortages occurring in Scenario V for the existing senior demands were identical to <br />those observed in Scenarios I through IV. Shortages to existing junior demands and to future <br />demands were higher than in Scenario IV but substantially smaller than Scenario m. Modeled <br />shortages under Scenario V are summarized in Table S-5. <br /> <br />, Williams Fork Reservoir remained relatively full over the study period and on only two <br />occasions briefly dropped below 60,000 af. The potential to exchange water up the Yampa <br />River was occasionally limited by either the natural flows or the minimum flow constraints <br />specified in the model. This placed more burden on Elkhead Reservoir to meet the Craig area <br />demands than occurred in Scenario IV. The result was an increase in t.'1e draw on Elkhead <br />over that of Scenario IV and greater fluctuations in storage levels than in Scenario IV. <br /> <br /> Table S-S <br /> Summary of Modeled Demand Shortages <br /> Over S3 Year Study Period <br />Demand Level Scenario I Scenario J[ Scenario III Scenario IV Scenario V <br />Potential 1989 <br />Maximum' 7,782 9,026 5,841 822 3,379 <br />A verage2 312 4,062 1,955 58 700 <br />Projected 2015 <br />Maximum' 9,819 12,613 6,413 822 4,974 <br />A verage2 362 4,517 2,084 58 742 <br />Projected 2040 <br />Maximum' 17 ,024 37,246 21,526 6,629 8,897 <br />A verage2 849 15,093 6,340 247 1,503 <br /> <br />Notes: 1 - Sum of maximum annual shortages to each demand over entire study period. <br />2 - Average ;mnua\ shortage to all demands. <br /> <br />Environmental Considerations <br /> <br />Instream Flows <br /> <br />An important aspect in formulating near and long term water development projects and <br />strategies as part of the Feasibility Study was the consideration of fisheries and other wildlife. <br />Of particular concern were stream flows predicted for the Yampa River mainstem in occupied <br />habitat areas of the endangered species. The modeled effect of administration of the Juniper <br /> <br />S-22 <br />